2023
DOI: 10.1212/wnl.0000000000207905
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation Study of the MDS Criteria for the Diagnosis of Multiple System Atrophy in the Mayo Clinic Brain Bank

Hiroaki Sekiya,
Shunsuke Koga,
Aya Murakami
et al.

Abstract: Background and Objective: The second consensus criteria in 2008 have been used in diagnosing multiple system atrophy (MSA). The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) proposed new diagnostic criteria for MSA in 2022. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy between these two criteria and validate the clinical utility of the newly proposed criteria for MSA. Methods: We conducted a retrospective autopsy cohort study of cons… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, Virameteekul et al ( 13) and Sekiya et al ( 14) performed a patho-logical evaluation of the usefulness of MDS criteria. In these studies, the sensitivity of the clinically established and clinically probable classifications was 20.4% and 62.1% (13), respectively, and 16% and 64% (14). The specificity of the clinically established and clinically probable classifications was 100% and 95.3% (13), respectively, and 99% and 74% (14).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, Virameteekul et al ( 13) and Sekiya et al ( 14) performed a patho-logical evaluation of the usefulness of MDS criteria. In these studies, the sensitivity of the clinically established and clinically probable classifications was 20.4% and 62.1% (13), respectively, and 16% and 64% (14). The specificity of the clinically established and clinically probable classifications was 100% and 95.3% (13), respectively, and 99% and 74% (14).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…In these studies, the sensitivity of the clinically established and clinically probable classifications was 20.4% and 62.1% (13), respectively, and 16% and 64% (14). The specificity of the clinically established and clinically probable classifications was 100% and 95.3% (13), respectively, and 99% and 74% (14). Therefore, the patients enrolled in this study generally met the diagnostic criteria from the early stages of disease onset, and a high rate of positive diagnoses was expected.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%