The International Panel on MS Diagnosis presents revised diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis (MS). The focus remains on the objective demonstration of dissemination of lesions in both time and space. Magnetic resonance imaging is integrated with clinical and other paraclinical diagnostic methods. The revised criteria facilitate the diagnosis of MS in patients with a variety of presentations, including "monosymptomatic" disease suggestive of MS, disease with a typical relapsingremitting course, and disease with insidious progression, without clear attacks and remissions. Previously used terms such as "clinically definite" and "probable MS" are no longer recommended. The outcome of a diagnostic evaluation is either MS, "possible MS" (for those at risk for MS, but for whom diagnostic evaluation is equivocal), or "not MS."
Several schemes for the diagnosis and clinical classification of multiple sclerosis (MS) have been advanced [l}. The best known is that published by Schumacher et alC31. The criteria for this scheme were established in order to select patients for participation in therapeutic trials, and pertain only to what might be called definite MS. No provision was made for incorporating supportive laboratory data into the diagnostic criteria.As no reliable specific laboratory test for the diagnosis of MS has been discovered, the diagnosis remains a clinical one, and there is still a need for clinical diagnostic criteria. However, several laboratory and clinical procedures have been developed within the last decade which aid greatly in demonstrating neurological dysfunction attributable to lesions, and even the lesions themselves.One problem with the various published diagnostic classifications is their discrepant terminology: what is considered "probable" in one is called "definite" in another. Another problem is that all the proposed schemes require much subjective judgment, a difficulty which cannot be completely overcome but can be diminished by adding to the clinical evaluation the results of laboratory, neuroimaging, neuropsychological, and neurophysiological procedures. Today there is a need for more exact criteria than existed earlier in order to conduct therapeutic trials in multicenter programs, to compare epidemiological surveys, to evaluate new diagnostic procedures, and to estimate the activity of the disease process in MS.
Method and ProcedureOn April 26 and 27, 1982, the following persons participated The participants reviewed in detail historical and clinical symptomatology in MS; immunological observations; cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tests; neurophysiological procedures including visual, brainstern auditory, trigeminal, and somatosensory evoked potential measurements; the evoked blink reflex; a variety of physiological and psychophysiological procedures; neuropsychological assessment; tissue imaging procedures such as computer assisted tomography (CT scanning) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR); and urological studies of bladder, bowel, and sexual dysfunction. This re-~
Over an 8 year period, 170 patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and 134 healthy controls were assessed at monthly intervals in order to ascertain environmental factors which might be important in producing exacerbation or progression of the illness, and to compare the frequency of common viral infections in the two groups. During cumulative periods designated "at risk" (2 weeks before the onset of infection until 5 weeks afterwards) annual exacerbation rates were almost 3-fold greater than those during periods not at risk. Approximately 9% of infections were temporally related to exacerbations, whereas 27% of exacerbations were related to infections. Frequency of common infections was approximately 20-50% less in MS patients than controls; it was progressively less in those with greater disability. Even in minimally disabled patients with similar potential for infectious contacts, the infection rate was significantly less than in controls, suggesting that MS patients could have superior immune defences against common viruses.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.