Ari Breiner1, Thomas H Brannagan. 1. Division of Neurology, University of Toronto, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There have been 15 formal sets of criteria published for the diagnosis of CIDP. No study to date has compared the sensitivity and specificity of all published criteria in the same patient population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with CIDP (n = 56) and controls with diabetic polyneuropathy (n = 37) or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n = 39) who were followed in an academic neuromuscular practice. The sensitivity and specificity of each CIDP criterion was calculated, including clinical, laboratory, and electrodiagnostic components. RESULTS: Sensitivities ranged from 1.8% to 87.5%; the Dyck (87.5%), Neuropathy Association (75%), and European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS; 73.2%) criteria ranked highest. Specificities ranged from 65.6% to 100% and, among the 3 most sensitive criteria, the EFNS (90.8%) and Neuropathy Association (82.9%) criteria were most specific. CONCLUSIONS: In our patient population, the EFNS and Neuropathy Association criteria stand out due to high sensitivity and specificity.
INTRODUCTION: There have been 15 formal sets of criteria published for the diagnosis of CIDP. No study to date has compared the sensitivity and specificity of all published criteria in the same patient population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with CIDP (n = 56) and controls with diabetic polyneuropathy (n = 37) or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n = 39) who were followed in an academic neuromuscular practice. The sensitivity and specificity of each CIDP criterion was calculated, including clinical, laboratory, and electrodiagnostic components. RESULTS: Sensitivities ranged from 1.8% to 87.5%; the Dyck (87.5%), Neuropathy Association (75%), and European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS; 73.2%) criteria ranked highest. Specificities ranged from 65.6% to 100% and, among the 3 most sensitive criteria, the EFNS (90.8%) and Neuropathy Association (82.9%) criteria were most specific. CONCLUSIONS: In our patient population, the EFNS and Neuropathy Association criteria stand out due to high sensitivity and specificity.
Authors: Emily K Mathey; Susanna B Park; Richard A C Hughes; John D Pollard; Patricia J Armati; Michael H Barnett; Bruce V Taylor; P James B Dyck; Matthew C Kiernan; Cindy S-Y Lin Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Alon Abraham; Majed Alabdali; Mohammad Qrimli; Hana Albulaihe; Ari Breiner; Carolina Barnett; Hans D Katzberg; Leif E Lovblom; Bruce A Perkins; Vera Bril Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-10-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mark Stettner; Lena Hinrichs; Rainer Guthoff; Silja Bairov; Ioannis N Petropoulos; Clemens Warnke; Hans-Peter Hartung; Rayaz A Malik; Bernd C Kieseier Journal: Ann Clin Transl Neurol Date: 2015-12-28 Impact factor: 4.511