Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Jan 1;92(1):26-33.
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006583. Epub 2018 Oct 31.

Misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis: Impact of the 2017 McDonald criteria on clinical practice

Affiliations
Review

Misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis: Impact of the 2017 McDonald criteria on clinical practice

Andrew J Solomon et al. Neurology. .

Abstract

Misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) (the incorrect assignment of a diagnosis of MS) remains a problem in contemporary clinical practice. Studies indicate that misdiagnosed patients are often exposed to prolonged unnecessary health care risks and morbidity. The recently published 2017 revision of the McDonald criteria for the diagnosis of MS provides an opportunity to consider the effect of these revisions on the problem of MS misdiagnosis. The 2017 McDonald criteria include several new recommendations to reduce potential for misdiagnoses. The criteria should be used for the types of patients in which validation studies were performed, specifically those patients who present with typical demyelinating syndromes. MRI lesion characteristics were defined for which McDonald criteria would be expected to perform with accuracy. However, 2017 revisions, which now include assessment for cortical lesions, and the inclusion of symptomatic lesions and positive oligoclonal bands for the fulfillment of diagnostic criteria, may have the potential to lead to misdiagnosis of MS if not applied appropriately. While the 2017 McDonald criteria integrate issues relating to MS misdiagnosis and incorporate specific recommendations for its prevention more prominently than prior criteria, the interpretation of clinical and radiologic assessments upon which these criteria depend will continue to allow misdiagnoses. In patients with atypical clinical presentations, the revised McDonald criteria may not be readily applied. In those situations, further evaluation or monitoring rather than immediate diagnosis of MS is prudent.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F, et al. . Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol 2018;17:162–173. - PubMed
    1. McNicholas N, Lockhart A, Yap SM, et al. . New versus old: implications of evolving diagnostic criteria for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Epub 2018 Apr 1. - PubMed
    1. Beesley R, Anderson V, Harding KE, et al. . Impact of the 2017 revisions to McDonald criteria on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Epub 2018 May 1. - PubMed
    1. Schwenkenbecher P, Wurster U, Sühs KW, Stangel M, Skripuletz T. Applying the 2017 McDonald diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2018;17:498. - PubMed
    1. Miller DH, Weinshenker BG, Filippi M, et al. . Differential diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis: a consensus approach. Mult Scler 2008;14:1157–1174. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances