What is the role of ancillary investigations in establishing the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis?

European Neurology

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 255-257

  Fazekas, Franz ^a   Offenbacher, Hans ^a   Hartung, Hans Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH ROUTE; EVOKED RESPONSE; HUMAN; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY;

ANCILLARY SERVICES, HOSPITAL; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 0030715247     PISSN: 00143022     EISSN: 14219913     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000113390     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, et al: New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols, Ann Neurol 1983; 13:227-231.
2. Paty DW, Oger JJF, Kastrukoff LF, et al: MR1 in the diagnosis of MS: A prospective study with comparison of clinical evaluation, evoked potentials, oligoclonal banding, and CT, Neurology 1988;38:180-185.
3. Lee KH, Hashimoto SA, Hoogc JP, et al: Magnetic resonance imaging of the head in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: A prospective 2-ycar follow-up with comparison of clinical evaluation, evoked potentials, oligoclonal banding, and CT, Neurology 1991:41:657-660.
4. Morrissey SP, Miller DH, Kendall BE, et al: The significance of brain magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities at presentation with clinically isolated syndromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis: A 5-year follow-up study, Brain 1993;116:135-146.
5. Filippini G, Comi G, Cosi V, et al: Sensitivities and predictive values of paraclinical tests for diagnosing multiple sclerosis, J Neurol 1994; 241:132-137.
6. Tas MW, Barkhof F, van Waldervcen MAA, Polman CH, Hommcs OR, Valk J: The effect of gadolinium on the sensitivity and specificity of MR in the initial diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, AJNR 1995;16:259-264.
7. Rolak LA, Beck RW, Paty DW, et al: Cerebrospinal fluid in acute optic neuritis: Experience of the optic neuritis treatment trial, Neurology 1996;46:368-372.
8. Paolino E, Fainardi E, Ruppi P, et al.: A prospective study on the predictive value of CSF oligoclonal bands and MRI in acute isolated neurological syndromes for subsequent progression to multiple sclerosis, J Neurol Neuro-surg Psychiatry 1996;60:572-575.
9. Giang DW, Grow VM, Mooney C, et al: Clinical diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, The impact of magnetic resonance imaging and ancillary testing, Arch Neurol 1994;51:61-66.
10. O'Connor P, Tansey C, Kucharczyk W, Detsky AS, Rochester-Toronto MRI Study Group: A randomized trial of test result sequencing in patients with suspected multiple sclerosis, Arch Neurol 1994;51:53-59.
11. Beer S, Rosier KM, Hess CW: Diagnostic value of paraclinical tests in multiple sclerosis: relative sensitivities and specificities for reclassification according to the Poser committee criteria, J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1995:59: 152-159.
12. Fazckas F, Oflenbacher H, Fuchs S, et al: Criteria for an increased specificity of MRI interpretation in elderly subjects with suspected multiple sclerosis, Neurology 1988:38:1822-1825
13. Offenbacher H, Fazekas F, Schmidt R, et al: Assessment of MRI criteria for a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, Neurology 1993:43:905-909.
14. Thorpe JW, Kidd D, Moseley IF, et al: Spinal MRI in patients with suspected multiple sclerosis and negative brain MRI, Brain 1996:119: 709-714.
15. Nuwer MR: Evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: in Raine CS, McFarland HF, Tourtelottc WW (eds): Multiple Sclerosis: Clinical and Pathogenetic Basis, London, Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp 43-55.
16. Miller DH: Imaging in multiple sclerosis; in Raine CS, McFarland HF, Tourtelotte WW (eds): Multiple Sclerosis: Clinical and Pathogenetic basis, London, Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp 31-41.