4.6 Review

The utility of cerebrospinal fluid analysis in patients with multiple sclerosis

期刊

NATURE REVIEWS NEUROLOGY
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 267-276

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nrneurol.2013.41

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (Clinical Competence Network Multiple Sclerosis)
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [SFB TR 128]
  4. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung
  5. Gemeinnutzige-Hertie Stiftung
  6. Verein zur Therapieforschung fur MS Kranke
  7. Department of Veterans Affairs
  8. National Multiple Sclerosis Society
  9. Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
  10. Hertie-Stiftung
  11. University of Ulm, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) requires the exclusion of other possible diagnoses. For this reason, the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) should be routinely analysed in patients with a first clinical event suggestive of MS. CSF analysis is no longer mandatory for diagnosis of relapsing-remitting MS, as long as MRI diagnostic criteria are fulfilled. However, caution is required in diagnosing MS in patients with negative MRI findings or in the absence of CSF analysis, as CSF investigation is useful to eliminate other causes of disease. The detection of oligoclonal IgG bands in CSF has potential prognostic value and is helpful for clinical decision-making. In addition, CSF analysis is important for research into the pathogenesis of MS. Pathophysiological and neurodegenerative findings of inflammation in MS have been derived from CSF investigations. Novel CSF biomarkers, though not yet validated, have been identified for diagnosis of MS and for ascertaining disease activity, prognosis and response to treatment, and are likely to increase in number with modern detection techniques. In this Review, we summarize CSF findings that shed light on the differential diagnosis of MS, and highlight the potential of novel biomarkers for this disease that could advance understanding of its pathophysiology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据