Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy: Diagnostic problems in clinical practice in Serbia

Abstract

AbstractMaking diagnosis of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is challenging since it can mimic a multitude of disorders, and is misdiagnosed in at least 50% of cases. We sought to determine the frequency of CIDP misdiagnosis in clinical practice in Serbia, to uncover CIDP mimics, and to identify factors that may aid in CIDP diagnosis. Our longitudinal retrospective cohort study included 86 eligible adult patients referred to the Neurology Clinic, University Clinical Centre of Serbia, with a diagnosis of CIDP. We also included 15 patients referred to us with different diagnoses that ended up having CIDP as their final diagnosis. Exactly half of patients referred as CIDP failed to meet the established diagnostic criteria (non‐CIDP) and were given an alternative diagnosis at the first hospitalization. At the 1‐year follow‐up, the diagnosis was further revised in four subjects. Confirmed CIDP patients usually had their initial diagnosis based on the nerve conduction studies (NCS), a typical presentation with symmetrical involvement of all four limbs, as well as higher frequencies of elevated protein levels and albuminocytologic dissociation in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). CIDP patients also responded better to immune therapy. We found that 52% of the patients initially referred to our Clinic as CIDP were given other diagnoses after a 1‐year follow‐up. Out of all CIDP cases, 27% had been unrecognized prior to referral to our Center. Utilization of clear and objective indicators ‐ conclusive NCS, improvement on therapy, and elevated CSF proteins may provide greater certainty in diagnosing CIDP.