Neuroleptic malignant syndrome and the catatonic dilemma

[Antipsychotic-induced motor symptoms in schizophrenic psychoses-Part 2 : Catatonic symptoms and neuroleptic malignant syndrome]

In rare cases, pharmacotherapy in schizophrenic psychoses can be associated with life-threatening antipsychotic-induced movement disorders. The two most severe complications are antipsychotic-associated catatonic symptoms (ACS) and neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS). Although both constellations necessitate rapid medical care, the diagnosis is still a clinical challenge. Although there is no established treatment of ACS (here designated as a specific subtype of catatonic symptoms), an attempt should be made with benzodiazepines and memantine can also be helpful. In severe drug-refractory cases electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) can be indicated. The NMS represents a life-threatening constellation that frequently requires intensive care unit treatment. The medicinal treatment with benzodiazepines, bromocriptine, amantadine, dantrolene and/or ECT is also advocated. Finally, this review article also summarizes the currently available literature for treatment of genuine catatonic symptoms. In conclusion, the abovementioned clinical syndromes must be rapidly recognized and treated. Early recognition and treatment of these movement disorders can under certain circumstances be lifesaving and favorably influence the later clinical outcome.

A Validation Study of the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Neuroleptic malignant syndrome requires prompt recognition for effective management, but there are no established diagnostic criteria. This is the first validation study of recently published international expert consensus (IEC) diagnostic criteria, which include priority points assigned on the basis of the importance of each criterion for making a diagnosis of neuroleptic malignant syndrome.

METHODS

Data were extracted from 221 archived telephone contact reports of clinician-initiated calls to a national telephone consultation service from 1997 to 2009; each case was given a total priority point score on the basis of the IEC criteria. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, (DSM-IV-TR) research criteria, in original form and modified to accept less than "severe" rigidity, served as the primary diagnostic reference standard. Consultants' diagnostic impressions were used as a secondary reference standard. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to optimize the priority point cutoff score with respect to the reference standards.

RESULTS

Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.715 (95% confidence interval, 0.645-0.785; P = 1.62 × 10) for consultant diagnoses to 0.857 (95% confidence interval, 0.808-0.907; P < 5 × 10) for modified DSM-IV-TR criteria. The latter was associated with 69.6% sensitivity and 90.7% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Agreement was best between IEC criteria with a cutoff score of 74 and modified DSM-IV-TR criteria (sensitivity, 69.6%; specificity, 90.7%); this cutoff score demonstrated the highest agreement in all comparisons. Consultant diagnoses showed much better agreement with modified, compared with original, DSM-IV-TR criteria, suggesting that the DSM-IV-TR criterion of "severe" rigidity may be more restrictive than what most knowledgeable clinicians use in practice.