Postgrad Med J

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Postgraduate Medical Journal 2008;84:378-381; doi:10.1136/jnnp.2006.109785
Copyright © 2008 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation

REVIEWS

Recommendations on diagnostic strategies for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

The French CIDP Study Group

Correspondence to:
Dr J-M Vallat, Department of Neurology, University Hospital, 2 Av. Martin Luther King, 87042 Limoges Cedex, France; jean-michel.vallat{at}unilim.fr


ABSTRACT
Background: Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is an immune mediated treatable peripheral neuropathy, the diagnosis of which is straightforward in more than half of cases. Numerous sets of electrophysiological criteria have been published. However, in some cases, electrophysiological data are not sufficient and patients that may benefit from treatment escape accurate diagnosis.

Objective: To describe a step by step diagnostic procedure for neurologists facing a peripheral neuropathy of undetermined cause, to help make an accurate diagnosis of CIDP.

Methods: A group of French experts was established, neurologists and neurophysiologists being recruited on the basis of personal experience with patients suffering from CIDP and also on publications in the field. A full literature review was conducted on the topic of diagnostic criteria and procedures for the diagnosis of CIDP, and meetings were scheduled to reach a consensus on the best diagnostic workup in different clinical situations.

Results: Six meetings were conducted and a consensus was reached, based on the available literature and experience in the management of such patients. Discussions resulted in defining five clinical situations in which a diagnosis of CIDP may be considered, and procedures were detailed in each case, including the location of nerve biopsy and use of non-conventional electrophysiological testing and imaging procedures.

Conclusion: The guidelines in the diagnostic procedure reported here result from a consensus of French experts in the field of peripheral neuropathy and allow a diagnosis of CIDP to be made in the most frequently encountered situations. These recommendations may be of value for physicians as they rely on the rational use of available techniques in typical clinical situations.








HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2008 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine