Caslake R, Moore J N, Gordon J C, Harris C E, Counsell C
Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, UK.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008 Nov;79(11):1202-7. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.144501. Epub 2008 May 9.
Accurate diagnosis of the cause of parkinsonism during life can be difficult, particularly at presentation, but few studies have described changes in clinical diagnosis over time and the effect of applying strict research criteria.
Incident patients with a possible/probable diagnosis of degenerative or vascular parkinsonism had a standardised assessment at diagnosis and at yearly intervals thereafter at which the most likely clinical diagnosis was recorded without strict application of research criteria. Four years after the beginning of the incident period, formal research criteria were applied retrospectively using patient records at baseline and the latest yearly follow-up.
Of 82 incident patients, 66 underwent at least 1 year of follow-up. After a median follow-up of 29 months, clinical diagnosis had changed in 22 (33%). Most (82%) changes occurred in the first year and were due to the development of atypical clinical features, particularly early cognitive impairment; the results of brain imaging; responsiveness to levodopa; and the rate of disease progression. Diagnosis on research criteria differed from latest clinical diagnosis in eight participants (12%). Research criteria gave a "probable" diagnosis in 71% of parkinsonian patients at follow-up but in only 15% at the initial assessment.
The clinical diagnosis of the cause of parkinsonism at presentation was often incorrect, even when made by those with a special interest. In particular, Parkinson's disease was overdiagnosed. Research criteria were often unhelpful in clarifying the diagnosis, even after a median of 29 months of follow-up. Further research is required to identify factors that may be used to improve the accuracy of diagnosis at initial assessment.
在患者生前准确诊断帕金森综合征的病因可能具有挑战性,尤其是在疾病初发时,但很少有研究描述临床诊断随时间的变化以及应用严格研究标准的影响。
可能/疑似诊断为退行性或血管性帕金森综合征的新发患者在诊断时及此后每年进行一次标准化评估,记录最可能的临床诊断,且不严格应用研究标准。在发病期开始四年后,使用基线时和最新年度随访时的患者记录对正式研究标准进行回顾性应用。
82例新发患者中,66例接受了至少1年的随访。中位随访29个月后,22例(33%)患者的临床诊断发生了变化。大多数(82%)变化发生在第一年,原因是出现了非典型临床特征,尤其是早期认知障碍;脑成像结果;对左旋多巴的反应;以及疾病进展速度。8名参与者(12%)的研究标准诊断与最新临床诊断不同。研究标准在随访时对71%的帕金森病患者给出了“疑似”诊断,但在初始评估时仅为15%。
即使由对此有专门兴趣的人员做出诊断,帕金森综合征初发时的临床病因诊断往往也是错误的。特别是,帕金森病被过度诊断。即使经过中位29个月的随访,研究标准在明确诊断方面往往也没有帮助。需要进一步研究以确定可用于提高初始评估诊断准确性的因素。