Neuroimmunology Division, Department of Neurology, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da USP, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Neurology, Hospital das Clínicas, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Mult Scler. 2023 Dec;29(14):1755-1764. doi: 10.1177/13524585231199323. Epub 2023 Oct 3.
Multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis remains a problem despite the well-validated McDonald 2017. For proper evaluation of errors in the diagnostic process that lead to misdiagnosis, it is adequate to incorporate patients who are already under regular follow-up at reference centers of demyelinating diseases.
To evaluate multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis in patients who are on follow-up at a reference center of demyelinating diseases in Brazil.
We designed an observational study including patients in regular follow-up, who were diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at our specialized outpatient clinic in the Hospital of Clinics in the University of Sao Paulo, from 1996 to 2021, and were reassessed for misdiagnosis in 2022. We evaluated demographic information, clinical profile, and complementary exams and classified participants as "established multiple sclerosis," "non-multiple sclerosis, diagnosed," and "non-multiple sclerosis, undiagnosed." Failures in the diagnostic process were assessed by the modified Diagnostic Error Evaluation and Research tool.
A total of 201 patients were included. After analysis, 191/201 (95.02%) participants were confirmed as "established multiple sclerosis," 5/201 (2.49%) were defined as "non-multiple sclerosis, diagnosed," and 5/201 (2.49%) were defined as "non-multiple sclerosis, undiagnosed."
Multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis persists in reference centers, emphasizing the need for careful interpretation of clinical findings to prevent errors.
尽管 McDonald 2017 标准已经得到充分验证,但多发性硬化症误诊仍然是一个问题。为了正确评估导致误诊的诊断过程中的错误,纳入已经在脱髓鞘疾病的参考中心进行常规随访的患者是足够的。
评估巴西一家脱髓鞘疾病参考中心的随访患者中的多发性硬化症误诊情况。
我们设计了一项观察性研究,纳入了 1996 年至 2021 年在我们位于圣保罗大学临床医院的专门门诊被诊断为多发性硬化症并在 2022 年重新评估误诊的患者。我们评估了人口统计学信息、临床特征和补充检查,并将参与者分为“确诊多发性硬化症”、“诊断为非多发性硬化症”和“未诊断为非多发性硬化症”。通过修改后的诊断错误评估和研究工具评估诊断过程中的失败。
共纳入 201 例患者。经过分析,201 例患者中的 191 例(95.02%)被确认为“确诊多发性硬化症”,5 例(2.49%)被定义为“诊断为非多发性硬化症”,5 例(2.49%)被定义为“未诊断为非多发性硬化症”。
多发性硬化症误诊在参考中心仍然存在,强调需要仔细解释临床发现以防止错误。