Confirming a Historical Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis: Challenges and Recommendations

Towards a Unified Set of Diagnostic Criteria for Multiple Sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

The 2017 McDonald criteria continued the separation of diagnostic criteria for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) and primary progressive MS (PPMS) for historical, rather than biological, reasons. We aimed to explore the feasibility of a single, unified set of diagnostic criteria when applied to patients with suspected PPMS.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients evaluated for suspected PPMS at 5 European centers. The 2017 McDonald PPMS criteria was the gold standard against which the 2017 McDonald RRMS dissemination in space (DIS) and dissemination in time criteria were evaluated. We also investigated modified RRMS DIS criteria, including: (i) optic nerve lesions; (ii) ≥2 spinal cord lesions; and (iii) higher fulfilment of DIS criteria alone (lesions in ≥3 regions) without dissemination in time/positive cerebrospinal fluid, for a diagnosis of PPMS.

RESULTS

A total of 282 patients were diagnosed with PPMS using the 2017 McDonald criteria, and 40 with alternate disorders. The 2017 McDonald RRMS DIS criteria and the modified DIS criteria including the optic nerve or ≥2 spinal cord lesions performed well in PPMS diagnosis when combined with dissemination in time/positive cerebrospinal fluid (sensitivity 92.9-95.4%, specificity 95%, accuracy 93.2-95.3%). A diagnosis of PPMS based on high fulfillment of modified RRMS DIS criteria had high specificity, but low sensitivity. A diagnostic algorithm applicable to patients evaluated for suspected MS is proposed.

INTERPRETATION

The 2017 McDonald RRMS criteria and modifications to DIS criteria, currently under consideration, performed well in PPMS diagnosis. Forthcoming revisions to the McDonald criteria should consider a single, unified set of diagnostic criteria for MS. ANN NEUROL 2025;97:571-582.

Outside-in repair technique is effective in traumatic tears of the meniscus in active adults: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Meniscal injuries are common. Outside-in meniscal repair is one of the techniques advocated for the management of traumatic meniscal tears. This systematic review investigated the outcomes of the outside-in repair technique for the management of traumatic tears of the menisci. The outcomes of interest were to investigate whether PROMs improved and to evaluate the rate of complications.

METHODS

Following the 2020 PRISMA statement, in May 2023, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed with no time constraints. All the clinical investigations which reported data on meniscal repair using the outside-in technique were considered for inclusion. Only studies which reported data on acute traumatic meniscal tears in adults were considered. Only studies which reported a minimum of 24 months of follow-up were eligible.

RESULTS

Data from 458 patients were extracted. 34% (155 of 458) were women. 65% (297 of 458) of tears involved the medial meniscus. The mean operative time was 52.9 ± 13.6 min. Patients returned to their normal activities at 4.8 ± 0.8 months. At a mean of 67-month follow-up, all PROMs of interest improved: Tegner scale (P = 0.003), Lysholm score (P < 0.0001), International Knee Documentation Committee (P < 0.0001). 5.9% (27 of 458) of repairs were considered failures. Four of 186 (2.2%) patients experienced a re-injury, and 5 of 458 (1.1%) patients required re-operation.

CONCLUSION

Meniscal repair using the outside-in technique can be effectively performed to improve the quality of life and the activity level of patients with acute meniscal tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Differential diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis: an updated consensus approach

Accurate diagnosis of multiple sclerosis requires careful attention to its differential diagnosis-many disorders can mimic the clinical manifestations and paraclinical findings of this disease. A collaborative effort, organised by The International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in Multiple Sclerosis in 2008, provided diagnostic approaches to multiple sclerosis and identified clinical and paraclinical findings (so-called red flags) suggestive of alternative diagnoses. Since then, knowledge of disorders in the differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis has expanded substantially. For example, CNS inflammatory disorders that present with syndromes overlapping with multiple sclerosis can increasingly be distinguished from multiple sclerosis with the aid of specific clinical, MRI, and laboratory findings; studies of people misdiagnosed with multiple sclerosis have also provided insights into clinical presentations for which extra caution is warranted. Considering these data, an update to the recommended diagnostic approaches to common clinical presentations and key clinical and paraclinical red flags is warranted to inform the contemporary clinical evaluation of patients with suspected multiple sclerosis.