Evaluation of diagnostic yield of the 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society diagnostic criteria for CIDP

Abstract

AbstractIntroduction/AimsIt is unclear whether the revised European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society diagnostic criteria (EAN/PNS 2021 criteria) improved the diagnostic yield for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) compared with the previous version. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of the EAN/PNS 2021 criteria and the European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society 2010 diagnostic criteria (EFNS/PNS 2010 criteria), with a specific focus on the electrodiagnostic criteria.MethodsData of patients with clinically suspected CIDP who exhibited objective treatment response, and of those with chronic axonal neuropathies, obtained between 2009 and 2021, were extracted retrospectively from our database. Patients who underwent nerve conduction studies in at least unilateral upper and lower extremities were enrolled. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of the EAN/PNS 2021 and EFNS/PNS 2010 criteria.ResultsIn total, 55 patients with clinically suspected CIDP and 36 patients with chronic axonal neuropathies were enrolled. When considering the “possible CIDP” category, the EAN/PNS 2021 criteria showed lower sensitivity than the EFNS/PNS 2010 criteria (78% vs. 93%, p < .05), whereas its specificity was higher (78% vs. 61%, p < .05). The lower sensitivity was caused mainly by the failure to fulfill the sensory nerve conduction criteria. The revised definition of abnormal temporal dispersion of the tibial nerve contributed markedly to the improved specificity.DiscussionTo improve the sensitivity of the EAN/PNS 2021 criteria, increasing the number of tested sensory nerves may be necessary.