Continuum Audio
Continuum Audio features conversations with the guest editors and authors of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology, the premier topic-based neurology clinical review and CME journal from the American Academy of Neurology. AAN members can earn CME for listening to interviews for review articles and completing the evaluation on the AAN’s Online Learning Center.
info_outline
Neuropalliative Care in Severe Acute Brain Injury and Stroke With Dr. Claire Creutzfeldt
12/24/2025
Neuropalliative Care in Severe Acute Brain Injury and Stroke With Dr. Claire Creutzfeldt
Severe acute brain injury presents acute and longitudinal challenges. Addressing total pain involves managing physical symptoms and providing emotional, social, and spiritual support to enhance quality of life for patients and their families. In this episode, Kait Nevel, MD, speaks with Claire J. Creutzfeldt, MD, author of the article “Neuropalliative Care in Severe Acute Brain Injury and Stroke” in the Continuum® December 2025 Neuropalliative Care issue. Dr. Nevel is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a neurologist and neuro-oncologist at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, Indiana. Dr. Liewluck is a professor in the department of neurology at the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Nevel: Hello, this is Dr Kait Nevel. Today I'm interviewing Dr Claire Creutzfeldt about her article on neuropalliative care in severe acute brain injury and stroke, which appears in the December 2025 Continuum issue on neuropalliative care. Claire, welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to the audience. Dr Creutzfeldt: Thanks, thanks for having me. Yeah, I'm an associate professor of neurology at the University of Washington. I'm a stroke neurologist and palliative care researcher and really have focused my career on how we can best integrate palliative care principles into the care of patients with severe stroke and other neurocritical illness. Dr Nevel: Wonderful. Well, I'm looking forward to talking to you today about your excellent article that I really enjoyed reading. To get us started, can you tell us what you feel is the most important takeaway from your article for the practicing neurologist? Dr Creutzfeldt: Yeah. You know, I think one is always a little biased by what one is working on currently. And I think what I'm most excited about or feel more strongly about is this idea that stroke and severe acute brain injury are not an event, but really a chronic illness that people are left with usually for the rest of their lives, that change their life radically. And I think that education, research funding, also the clinical setting, current healthcare models aren't set up for that. And this idea that severe acute brain injury, you know, should be viewed as a lifelong condition that requires support across all ranges of goals of care. So curative, restorative, palliative and end-of-life care. Dr Nevel: Yeah, I love that part of your article, how you really highlighted that concept. And I think obviously that's something that we see in neurology and learn, especially as we transition out of our residency stages. But I think especially for the trainees listening, can sometimes be hospital inpatient-heavy, if you will, that kind of you can lose sight of that, that these acute strokes, severe acute brain injury, it turns into a chronic illness or condition that patients are dealing with lifelong. Dr Creutzfeldt: Often what we do in a very acute setting is like, is really cool and sexy and like, we can cure people from their stroke if they come, you know, at the right time with the right kind of stroke to the right hospital. And often the symptoms that people come in with much later on are harder to treat and address, partly because the focus in education, clinical and research just hasn't been as much on that time. Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely. So, can you talk to us about this concept of total pain? What does it mean, and how do we incorporate this concept into the way that we view our approach, our patient care? Dr Creutzfeldt: Total pain is a very old word, but it's sort of coming back into fashion in the palliative care world because it really describes all those sources of suffering or sources of distress, like, beyond what we sort of really think of as sort of the physical symptoms in recovery of stroke. As many of you know, palliative care often thinks in this multidimensional way of the physical distress, physical pain, but also psychological, emotional, social and spiritual, existential. And both- we sort of created sort of a figure that incorporates all of them and also includes both patients and their family members. They share some of these sources of distress, but they also have distinct ones that need to be addressed. And at the core of that total pain is what we need to provide, is sort of optimal communication and goals-of-care prognosis. Dr Nevel: Yeah, I'm thinking about all of those aspects and not just focusing on one. How does the disease trajectory of severe acute brain injury and stroke play a role in the palliative care approach? And how should we kind of going back to that original point of this idea of severe acute brain injury being an acute event and then oftentimes turning into kind of a chronic condition? How does that play a role in how we address palliative care with our patients, or kind of the stages of palliative care with our patients? Dr Creutzfeldt: Yeah, I think several things, especially for neurologists, is the more traditional palliative care illnesses, like cancer or congestive heart failure, illnesses where people are diagnosed when they're still functioning at a relatively high level and tend to have time to consider their prognosis and their goals of care in the end of life wishes and to meet with palliative care and to consider their personhood. Who am I? What's most important for me? And stroke, people with stroke, they not only present at their worst, they meet us at their worst, at a time when the patient themselves usually can't speak for themselves, when their personhood has been stripped from them. And then as providers, we, you know, we often really just get that one opportunity to get the conversation right and to guide people towards, you know, what we would call optimal and goal-concordant care. So, the challenges are many. I do think that the burden of these early conversations is on neurologists and really requires the neurologists to show compassion, to learn communication skills, think really hard about how you want to communicate prognosis and goals of care early on, because it's going to color people's experiences and decisions longitudinally. You asked about, sort of, this trajectory. And I do think it's important to think about, you know, what really happens even after the thrombectomy or even after we discharge people, especially from the ICU. Because for us, often after sort of day five or six, you know, we're sort of done. We're thinking about secondary stroke prevention. And, you know, how do I get the patient to rehab or out of the hospital? For the patients and families, this is when it really all just starts. You know, this is when they- when they're first memories are usually, you know, they hardly remember that acute setting. And so, when they are medically stable, we're done with the acute blood pressure treatment where we've removed the Foley, we've made a decision about nutrition. For us that tends to be a time where we let go a little; for patients and families that tends to actually be the time when they have to think about how am I going to live with this and what are the next several months or years going to look like? And so being there for them is important. Dr Nevel: That's such a, I think, important point, that when we have our plan in place, we know medically what the plan is for that patient and we're starting to step back, think about rehab or discharge. That's when oftentimes more quote-unquote “reality” steps in for patients and families about what their future is going to look like. Dr Creutzfeldt: And medical stability is not even close to neurological stability. And so, they are still in the middle of real prognostic uncertainty, and often waxing and waning symptoms or new symptoms coming up for them. Like pain, you know, post thalamic pain syndrome, just as an example, tends to be something that doesn't develop until later. Dr Nevel: Right, right. Absolutely. And since you touched on this concept of prognostic uncertainty, and, you know, that's something that's so challenging in severe acute brain injury, especially the early days when you talk about this, you know, that things tend to become a little bit more certain as more time passes. But these are really hard conversations because a lot of times feel like big decisions that need to be made early on, you know? Dr Creutzfeldt: Huge! Dr Nevel: Sometimes things like trach and PEG and things like that. How do you approach that conversation? I know you talk about that a little bit in your article. You touch on that, some of the, kind of, strategies or concepts that we use in palliative care to approach this prognostic uncertainty with patients. Dr Creutzfeldt: Yeah, I think the challenge is to balance this acknowledging uncertainty with still being able to guide the families and allow them to trust you. So, there are a few things that I have said in the past, and I have taught in the past, and I don't use anymore. They include sentences like I don't have a crystal ball, for example. Nobody was asking you for one. The other one that I want us to avoid, I think, is the sentence we are terrible at prognosticating. Because what I have seen is that that sentence carries on for families. And families at nine months are still saying, well, you guys are terrible at prognosticating. That's what you told me. First of all, it's all relative, and relative to non-neural providers---even at this time using Google and AI, we're actually quite good at prognosticating. It's just that a wide range early on. So that's how I would change that sentence is, early on after stroke, the range of possible outcomes is still very wide. And so, you've communicated uncertainty without saying I have no idea what I'm doing, which is not true. That is in order to help families be able to trust you and also to trust the person who comes after you, because we all know that a week or two after admission, we do know a lot more. And if we told them on day one that we’re terrible at prognosticating, it's hard to sort of build that trust again later. You also asked about, you know, communication strategies. And I think it's this range of possible outcomes that I think is a good guideline for us to work on. And that range, sort of like a confidence interval, is still very wide early on. And as we collect more information over time, both about the clinical scenario that is evolving in front of us and about the patient who we are learning more about over time, this confidence interval becomes smaller. And that's where this idea of the best case/worst case scenario sort of conversation, for example, comes from: that range of possible outcomes. Dr Nevel: So, what to you is most challenging about palliative care for patients with severe acute brain injury and stroke? Dr Creutzfeldt: I think the biggest challenge in stroke care is balancing restorative and curative care with palliative and end-of-life. And that is especially early on when sort of everything is possible, when patients and families want to hear the good news and, I think, are also quite willing to hear the bad news, and probably should. So, I think that that communication is hard when, you know, really we want to provide goal-concordant care. We want to make sure that people get that care that is most important to them and can meet the outcomes that are most important to them. Dr Nevel: Yeah, agree. What is most rewarding? Dr Creutzfeldt: I think these patients and families have enormous needs and are extremely grateful if they can find someone that they can trust and who can guide them and who will stick with them. And when I say someone, I think that can be a team. That always depends on how we communicate. In the ideal world, it would be the same person following someone over time, the patient and the family over time. But in our current healthcare system, we're usually moving on from one place to another and being able to communicate with the people that come after you. Telling the family that you're a team and supporting them through that, I think, is really important. Dr Nevel: Yeah. And like you touched upon, patients and families, I think oftentimes they're looking for, you mentioned, you know, the sharing and communication and they're looking for information. Dr Creutzfeldt: You know, what's really rewarding is working with a team. And health care has really excelled at that. And I think we have a lot done from them is that it's not always the MD that family needs. And we have a lot of people at our side, and I think we need more of them. Chaplains, social workers; psychologists, actually, I think; and nurses or- in an ideal world, would really work together to support these multidisciplinary, multidimensional symptoms. Dr Nevel: Yeah. I think it benefits both the patient and the care team, too. Dr Creutzfeldt: Absolutely! Dr Nevel: It’s helpful to be part of a team. You know, there's camaraderie in that and, like, a shared goal, and I think the thought is rewarding, too. Dr Creutzfeldt: If we really try and think about severe stroke as a chronic illness or severe acute brain injury as a chronic illness not unlike cancer, then if you think about the systems that have been built for cancer where an entire team of providers follows the patient and their family member over time, I think we need that, too. Dr Nevel: Yeah, I agree. That point, every member of the team has overlapping things, but has a slightly individual role to a degree too, which is also helpful to the patient and the family. You talked about this a little bit in your article, and I want to hear more from you about what we know about healthcare disparities in this area of medicine and in providing palliative care for patients with severe acute brain injury and stroke. Dr Creutzfeldt: Yeah, I think actually a lot of the huge decisions that we make, especially early on, are highly variable. And can identify people by various things, whether it's their race or ethnicity or sex or age, or even where they live in the United States. But decisions tend to be made differently. And so, just as an example, we know that I think people who identify as black, for sure, are less likely to receive the acute, often life-saving interventions like TNK or thrombectomy and more likely to undergo longer-term, life-prolonging treatment like PEG and trach. That seems true, after adjusting for clinical severity and things like that. And so disparities like that may be based on cultural preferences or well-informed decisions, and then we can support them. But of course, unfortunately there's a clear idea when we see, often, unexplained variability that a lot is due to uninformed decisions and poor communication and possibly racism in certain parts. And that is, of course, something that has to be addressed. Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely. What are future areas of research in this area? I know you do a lot of research in this area and I'd love to hear about some of it and what you think is exciting or kind of new and going to change the way we think about things, perhaps. Dr Creutzfeldt: I think every aspect of stroke continues to be exciting and just, you know, our focus of today and my research is on palliative care. I mean, obviously, the things we can do in rehab these days have to be embraced, and the acute stuff. But I think this longitudinal support, an ideally longitudinal multidisciplinary support for patients and families, requires more research. I think it will help us with prognosis. It will help us with communicating things early on and learning more about sort of multidimensional symptoms of these patients over time. That requires more research. And then, how can we change the healthcare system---in a sustainable way, obviously---to maximize quality of life for the survivors and their families? Dr Nevel: Going back to that total pain again, making sure that we're incorporating that longitudinally. Dr Creutzfeldt: I think there are currently 94 million people worldwide living with the aftermath of a stroke. I joined a stroke survivor support group recently. People are supporting each other that have that had their stroke, like, 14 years ago and are still in that just to show that this is not one and done. People are still struggling with symptoms afterwards and want support. Dr Nevel: Before we close out, is there anything else that you'd like to add? Dr Creutzfeldt: Your questions have all been great, and I think one observation is that we've talked a lot about, sort of, new ideas of the need for longitudinal care for patients after severe stroke. There's still a ton for all of us to do to optimize the care we provide in the very acute setting, to optimize the way we communicate in the very acute setting. To make sure we are, for example, providing the same message as our team members and providing truly compassionate goal-concordant care from the time they hit the emergency room throughout. Including time-limited trials, for example. Dr Nevel: Well, thank you so much for chatting with me today about your article on this really important topic. Again, today I've been interviewing Dr Claire Creutzfeldt about her article on neuropalliative care in severe acute brain injury and stroke, which appears in the December 2025 Continuum issue on neuropalliative care. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues. And as always, to our listeners, please check out the article. It's great, highly recommend. And thank you to our listeners for joining us today. And thank you so much, Claire, for sharing your expertise with us today. Dr Creutzfeldt: Thanks for having me. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/39184595
info_outline
End-of-Life Care and Hospice With Dr. Claudia Chou
12/17/2025
End-of-Life Care and Hospice With Dr. Claudia Chou
In the hospital setting, neurologists may be responsible for managing common end-of-life symptoms. Comprehensive end-of-life care integrates knowledge of the biomedical aspects of disease with patients’ values and preferences for care; psychosocial, cultural, and spiritual needs; and support for patients and their families. In this episode, Teshamae Monteith, MD, FAAN, speaks with Claudia Z. Chou, MD, author of the article “End-of-Life Care and Hospice” in the Continuum® December 2025 Neuropalliative Care issue. Dr. Monteith is the associate editor of Continuum® Audio and an associate professor of clinical neurology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine in Miami, Florida. Dr. Knox is an assistant professor of neurology and a consultant in the Division of Community Internal Medicine, Geriatrics and Palliative Care at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith. Today I'm interviewing Dr Claudia Chou about her article on end-of-life care and hospice, which is found in the December 2025 Continuum issue on neuropalliative care. Welcome to our podcast. How are you? Dr Chou: I'm doing well. Thank you for having me. This is really exciting to be here. Dr Monteith: Absolutely. So, why don't you introduce yourself to our audience? Dr Chou: Sure. My name is Claudia Chou. I am a full time hospice and palliative medicine physician at Mayo Clinic in Rochester. I'm trained in neurology, movement disorders, and hospice and palliative medicine. I'm also passionate about education, and I'm the program director for the Hospice and Palliative Medicine fellowship here. Dr Monteith: Cool. So just learning about your training, I kind of have an idea of how you got into this work, but why don't you tell me what inspired you to get into this area? Dr Chou: It was chance, actually. And really just good luck, being in the right place at the right time. I was in my residency and felt like I was missing something in my training. I was seeing these patients who were suffering strokes and had acute decline in functional status. We were seeing patients with new diagnosis of glioblastoma and knowing what that future looked like for them. And while I went into neurology because of a love of neuroscience, localizing the lesion, all of those things that we all love about neurology, I still felt like I didn't have the skill set to serve patients where they perhaps needed me the most in those difficult times where they were dealing with serious illness and functional decline. And so, the serendipitous thing was that I saw a grand rounds presentation by someone who works in neurology and palliative care for people with Parkinson's disease. And truly, it's not an exaggeration to say that by the end of that lecture, I said, I need to do palliative care, I need to rotate in this, I need to learn more. I think this is what I've been missing. And I had plans to practice both movement disorders neurology and palliative care, but I finished training in 2020… and that was not a long time ago. We can think of all the things that were going on, all the different global forces that were influencing our day-to-day decisions. And the way things worked out, staying in palliative care was really what my family and I needed. Dr Monteith: Wow, so that's really interesting. Must have been a great lecturer. Dr Chou: Yes, like one of the best. Dr Monteith: So why don't you tell me about the objectives of your article? Dr Chou: The objectives may be to fill in some of the gaps in knowledge that may be present for the general neurologist. We learn so much in neurology training, so much about how to diagnose and treat diseases, and I think I would argue that this really is part and parcel of all we should be doing. We are the experts in these diseases, and just because we're shifting to end-of-life or transitioning to a different type of care doesn't mean that we back out of someone's care entirely or transition over to a hospice or palliative care expert. It is part of our job to be there and guide patients and their care partners through this next phase. You know, I'm not saying we all need to be hospice and palliative care experts, but we need to be able to take those first steps with patients and their care partners. And so, I think objectives are really to focus in on, what are those core pieces of knowledge for end-of-life care and understanding hospice so we can take those first steps with patients and their care partners? Dr Monteith: So, why don't you give us some of those essential points in your article? Dr Chou: Yeah. In one section of the article, I talk about common symptoms that someone might experience at the end of life and how we might manage those. These days, a lot of hospitals have order sets that talk us through those symptoms. We can check things off of a drop-down menu. And yet I think there's a little bit more nuance to that. There may be situations in which we would choose one medication over another. There may be medications that we've never really thought of in terms of symptom management before. Something that I learned in my hospice and palliative medicine fellowship was that haloperidol can be helpful for nausea. I know that's usually not one of our go-tos in neurology for any number of reasons. So, I think that extra knowledge can take us pretty far when we're managing end of life symptoms, particularly in the hospital setting. And then I think the other component is the hospice component. A lot of us may have not had experience talking about hospice, talking about what hospice can provide, and again, knowing how to take those first steps with patients. We may be referring to social work or palliative medicine to start those conversations. But again, I think this is something that's definitely learnable and something that should be part of our skill set in neurology. Dr Monteith: Great. And so, when you speak about symptom management and being more comfortable with the tools that we have, how can we be more efficient and more effective at that? Dr Chou: Think about what the common symptoms are at end of life. We may know this kind of intuitively, but what we commonly see are things like pain, nausea, dyspnea, anxiety, delirium or agitation. And so, I think having a little bit of a checklist in mind can be helpful. You know, how can I systematically think through a differential, almost, for why my patient might be uncomfortable? Why they might be restless? Have I thought through these different symptoms? Can I try a medication from my tool kit? See if that works, and if it does, we can continue on. If not, what's the next thing that I can pivot to? So, I think these are common skills for a little bit of a differential diagnosis, if you will, and how to work through these problems just with the end-of-life lens on it. Dr Monteith: So, are there any, like, validated tools or checklists that are freely available? Dr Chou: I don't think there's been anything particularly validated for end-of-life care in neurologic disease. And so, a lot of our treatments and our approaches are empiric, but I don't think there's been anything validated, per se. Dr Monteith: Great. So, why don't we talk a little bit about the approach to discussions on hospice? We all, as you kind of alluded to, want to be effective neurologists, care for our patients, but we sometimes deal with very debilitating diseases. And so, when we think that or suspect that our patient is kind of terminally ill, how do we approach that to our patients? Of course, our patients come from different backgrounds, different experiences. So, what is your approach? Dr Chou: So, when we talk about hospice and when a patient may be appropriate for hospice, we have to acknowledge that we think that they may be in the last six months of their disease. We as the neurologist are the experts in their disease and the best ones to weigh in on that prognosis. The patient and their care partners then have to accept that the type of care that hospice provides is what makes sense for them. Hospice focuses on comfort and treating a patient's comfort as the primary goal. Hospice is not as interested in treating cancer, say, to prolong life. Hospice is not as interested in life-prolonging measures and treatments that are not focused at comfort and quality of life. And so, when we have that alignment between our understanding of a patient's disease and their prognosis and the patient care partner’s goal is to focus on comfort and quality of life above all else, that's when we have a patient who might be appropriate for hospice and ready to hear more about what that actually entails. Dr Monteith: And what are some, maybe, myths that neurologist healthcare professionals may have about hospice that you really want us to kind of have some clarity on? Dr Chou: That's a great question. What we often tell patients is that hospice's goal is to help patients live as well as possible in the time that they have left. Again, our primary objective is not life prolongation, but quality of life. Hospice's goal is also not to speed up or slow down the natural dying process. Sometimes we do get questions about that: can't you make this go faster or we're ready for the end. But really, we are there to help patients along the natural journey that their body is taking them on. And I think hospice care can actually be complex. In the inpatient setting, in particular in neurology, we may be seeing patients who have suffered large strokes and have perhaps only days to a few weeks of life left. But in the outpatient setting and in the home hospice setting, patients can be on hospice for many months, and so they will have new care needs, new urinary tract infections, sometimes new rashes, the need to change their insulin regimens around to avoid extremes of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia. So, there is a lot of complexity in that care and a lot that can be wrapped up under that quality-of-life and comfort umbrella. Dr Monteith: And to get someone to hospice requires a bit of prognostication, right? Six months of prediction in terms of a terminal illness. I know there's some nuances to that. So how can you make us feel more comfortable about making the recommendations for hospice? Dr Chou: I think this is a big challenge in the field. We're normally guided by Medicare guidelines that say when a patient might be hospice-appropriate. And so, for a neurologic disease, this really only encompasses four conditions: ALS, stroke, coma, and Alzheimer's dementia. And we can think of all the other diseases that are not encompassed in those four. And so, I think we say that we paint the picture of what it means to have a prognosis of six months or less. So, from the neurologic side, that can be, what do you know about this disease and what end-stage might look like? What is the pattern of the patient's functional decline? What are they needing more help with? Are there other factors at play such as heart failure or COPD that may in and of themselves not be a qualifying diagnosis for hospice, but when it's taken together in the whole clinical picture, you have a patient who's very ill and one that you're worried may die in the next six months or less? Dr Monteith: Then you also had some nice charts on kind of disease-specific guidelines. Can you take us a little bit through that? Dr Chou: The article does contain tables about specific criteria that may qualify someone for hospice with these neurologic conditions. And they are pretty dense. I know they're a checklist of a lot of different things. And so, how we practice is by trying to refer patients to hospice based on those guidelines as much as possible and then using our own clinical judgment as well, what we have seen through taking care of patients through the years. So, again, really going back to that decline. What is making you feel uncomfortable about this patient's prognosis? What is making you feel like, gosh, this patient could be well supported by hospice, and they could have six months or less? So, all of that should go into your decision as well. And all of that should go into your discussion with the patient and their care partners. Dr Monteith: Yeah. And reading your article, what stood out was all the services that patients can receive under hospice. So, I think sometimes people think, okay, this is terminal illness, let's get to hospice for whatever reasons, but not necessarily all the lists and lists and lists of benefits of hospice. So, I don't know that everyone's aware of all those benefits. So, can you talk to us a little bit about that? Dr Chou: Yeah, I like that you brought that up because that's also something that I often say to patients and their care partners when we're talking about hospice. When the time is right for a patient to enroll in hospice, they should not feel like they're giving anything up. There should be no more clinical trial that they're hoping to chase down, and so they should just feel like they're gaining all of those good supports: care that comes to their home, a team that knows them well, someone that's available twenty-four hours a day by phone and can actually even come into the home setting if needed to help with symptom management. Hospice comes as well with the psychosocial supports for just coping with what dying looks like. We know that's not easy to be thinking about dying for oneself, or for a family member or care partner to be losing their loved one. So, all of those supports are built into hospice. I did want to make a distinction, too, that hospice does not provide custodial care, which I explain to patients as care of the body, those daily needs for bathing, dressing, eating, etc. Sometimes patients are interested in hospice because they're needing more help at home, and I have to tell them that unfortunately, our healthcare system is not built for that. And if that's the sole reason that someone is interested in hospice, we have to think about a different approach, because that is not part of the hospice benefit. Dr Monteith: Thank you for that. And then I learned about concurrent care. So why don't you tell us a little bit about that? That's a little bit of a nuance, right? Dr Chou: Yeah, that is a little bit of a nuance. And so, typically when patients are enrolling in hospice, they are transitioning from care the way that it's normally conducted in our healthcare system. So, outpatient visits to all of the specialists and to their primary care providers, the chance to go to the ER or the ICU for higher levels of care. And yet there are a subset of patients who can still have all of those cares alongside hospice care. That really applies to two specific populations: veterans who are receiving care through the Veterans Administration, and then younger patients, so twenty six years old and less, can receive that care through, essentially, a pediatric carve out. Dr Monteith: Great. Well, I mean, you gave so much information in your article, so our listeners are going to have to read it. I don’t want you to spill everything, but if you can just kind of give me a sense what you want a neurologist to take away from your article, I think that would be helpful. Dr Chou: I think what I want neurologist to take away is that, again, this is something that is part of what we do as neurologists. This is part of our skill set, and this is part of what it means to take good care of patients. I think what we do in this transition period from kind of usual cares, diagnosis, full treatment to end of life, really can have impact on patients and their care partners. It's not uncommon for me to hear from family members who have had another loved one go through hospice about how that experience was positive or negative. And so, we can think about the influence for years to come, even, because of how well we can handle these transitions. That really can be more than the patient in front of us in their journey. That is really important, but it can also have wide-reaching implications beyond that. Dr Monteith: Excellent. And I know we were talking earlier a little bit about your excitement with the field and where it's going. So why don't you share some of that excitement? Dr Chou: Yeah. And so, I think there is a lot still to come in the field of neuropalliative care, particularly from an evidence base. I know we talked a lot about the soft skills, about presence and communication, but we are clinicians at heart, and we need to practice from an evidence base. I know that's been harder in palliative care, but we have some international work groups that really are trying to come together, see what our approaches look like, see where standardization may need to happen or where our differences are actually our strength. I think there can be a lot of variability in what palliative care looks like. So, my hope is that evidence base is coming through these collaborations. I know it's hard to have a conversation these days without talking about artificial intelligence, but that is certainly a hope. When you look at morbidity, when you look at patients with these complicated disease courses, what is pointing you in the direction of, again, a prognosis of six months or less or a patient who may do better with this disease versus not? And so, I think there's a lot to come from the artificial intelligence and big data realm. For the trainees listening out there, there is no better time to be excited about neuropalliative care and to be thinking about neuropalliative care. I said that I stumbled upon this field, and hopefully someone is inspired as well by listening to these podcasts and reading Continuum to know what this field is really about. And so, it's been exponential growth since I joined this field. We have medical students now who want to come into neuropalliative care as a profession. We have clinicians who are directors of neuropalliative care at their institutions. We have an international neuropalliative care society and neuropalliative care at AAN. And I think we are moving closer to that dream for all of us, which is that patients living with serious neurologic illness can be supported throughout that journey. High-quality, evidence-based palliative care. We're not there yet, but I think it is a possibility that we reach that in my lifetime. Dr Monteith: Well, excellent. I look forward to maybe another revision of this article with some of that work incorporated. And it's been wonderful to talk to you and to reflect on how better to approach patients that are towards the end of life and to help them with that decision-making process. Thank you so much. Dr Chou: Yeah, thank you for having me. And we're very excited about this issue. Dr Monteith: Today. I've been interviewing Dr Claudia Chou about her article on end-of-life care and hospice, which is found in the December 2025 Continuum issue on neuropalliative care. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/39184550
info_outline
The Approach to Serious-Illness Conversations With Dr. Jessica Besbris
12/10/2025
The Approach to Serious-Illness Conversations With Dr. Jessica Besbris
Neurologists are privileged to act as guides for patients as they navigate the complex course of serious neurologic illnesses. Because of the impact on quality of life, personhood, and prognosis, neurologists must be able to conduct serious-illness conversations to improve rapport, reduce patient anxiety and depression, and increase the likelihood that treatment choices agree with patient goals and values. In this episode, Teshamae Monteith, MD, FAAN speaks with Jessica M. Besbris, MD, author of the article “The Approach to Serious-Illness Conversations” in the Continuum® December 2025 Neuropalliative Care issue. Dr. Monteith is the associate editor of Continuum® Audio and an associate professor of clinical neurology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine in Miami, Florida. Dr. Besbris is an assistant professor of neurology and internal medicine, and the director of the neuropalliative care, at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, California. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Monteith: Hi, this is Dr Teshamae Monteith. Today I'm interviewing Dr Jessica Besbris about her article on the approach to serious illness conversation, which is found in the December 2025 Continuum issue on neuropalliative care. How are you? Dr Besbris: I'm doing great. Thank you so much for having me here today. Dr Monteith: Well, thank you for being on our podcast. Dr Besbris: My pleasure. Dr Monteith: Why don't we start off with you introducing yourself? Dr Besbris: Sure. So, my name is Jessica Besbris. I am a neurologist with fellowship training in palliative care, and I am currently at Cedars Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, where I am the director of our neuropalliative care program. Dr Monteith: Excellent. So, how did you get involved in that? Dr Besbris: Like, I think, many neurologists, I always knew I wanted to be a neurologist---or, I should say, from the moment I decided to be a doctor I knew that that was the type of doctor I wanted to be, a neurologist. So, I went into medical school with the aim of becoming a neurologist. And very quickly, when I started my clinical years, I was exposed to patients who were living with very serious illnesses. And I found myself really drawn to opportunities to help, opportunities to make people feel better, opportunities to improve quality of life in situations that on the face of it seemed really challenging, where maybe it seemed like our usual treatments were not necessarily the answer or were not the only answer. And so, I pretty quickly recognized that taking care of patients with serious illness was going to be a big part of my life as a neurologist and that palliative care was the way I wanted to help these patients and families. Dr Monteith: And you mentioned you're leading the group. So, how many colleagues do you have in the program? Dr Besbris: We have a very large palliative care group, but within neuropalliative care, it's myself and one other physician, a nurse practitioner, and a social worker. Dr Monteith: Okay, well, I know you guys are busy. Dr Besbris: Yes, we are very happy to be busy. Dr Monteith: Yes. So, let's talk about the objectives of your article. Dr Besbris: Sure. So, the goal of this article is to impress upon neurologists that it really is all of our jobs as neurologists to be having these conversations with our patients who are affected with serious illness. And then, in most areas of neurology, these conversations will come up. Whether it's giving a life changing diagnosis, or talking about treatment choices, or treatment not going the way that we had hoped, or even sometimes progression of disease or end-of-life care. These topics will come up for most of us in neurology, and really, we're hoping that this article not only makes the case that neurologists can and should be having these conversations, but that there are skills that we can teach in this article and with other resources to improve the skill level and sense of confidence that neurologists have when they enter into these conversations. Dr Monteith: Great. I read that there are some developments in the field, on organizational levels, about really making these skills part of standard of care in terms of education. So, can you speak to that? Dr Besbris: Yes. So, there have been a couple of really landmark papers and changes in the educational landscape that I think have really brought neuropalliative care in general, and serious illness conversation in particular, to the forefront. So, there were the position statements released by the American Academy of Neurology in 1996 and 2022, both of which really said, hey, all neurologists should be doing this and receive training on how to have these conversations and provide this care. And the ACGME, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, also requires neurology residency programs to learn how to communicate with patients and families, assess goals, and talk about end-of-life care. So, there's a real structural imperative now for neurologists to learn early on how to have serious illness conversations with their patients. Dr Monteith: Great. If there's anything for our listeners to get out of this conversation, what are the essential points? Dr Besbris: If you only take away one or two things from this conversation, I hope that they're that this is an awesome responsibility to be in a moment with a patient going through something challenging, to meet them in that moment with thoughtful, honest, empathic conversations about who they are and what's important to them. And that, just like any other procedure, these are skills that can be taught so that you can feel really confident and comfortable being in these moments. Dr Monteith: Excellent. Wow. Okay, I feel your energy and your empathy already. And so, why don't we just talk about skills? What is the best way to deliver tough news? I read this wonderful chart on SPIKES protocol. Dr Besbris: Yeah, the SPIKES protocol is one really well-known way to deliver serious news. And what's nice about SPIKES is it gives a mnemonic. And as neurology learners, we all love a good mnemonic to help you really center yourself when you're entering into these conversations so that you have a structured format to follow, just like with any procedure. So, the SPIKES protocol stands for Setting: so, making sure you have the right environment; Perception, or assessing what your patient or surrogate decision maker knows already so that you know where to begin; receiving an Invitation to deliver serious news. And then K stands for Knowledge, delivering in a clear and concise way the information that you want to make sure the family or patient walk away with. E for exploring Emotion; and S for really Summarizing what's been discussed and Strategizing on next steps. I think that having these kinds of conversations, it's just like being expert in anything. When you first start learning, it's helpful to have a set of very concrete steps you can follow. And you might even think through the mnemonic as you get ready to walk into that room. And as you become more expert, the flow becomes more natural. And maybe what you do before walking in to prepare is just honing what is that headline? What is that concise statement that I'm really going to give? And the rest may start to feel more natural and less protocolized. Dr Monteith: And there are a few other mnemonics. There's the NURSE mnemonic, which I like. You know, there's a balance between saying things and sounding kind of… you know, sometimes they're like, well, how could you understand what I'm going through? Have you been through something like this? And people shy away, and they're afraid to kind of be a part of these conversations. So how do we approach that with this, a NURSE mnemonic in a way that's kind of sincere? Dr Besbris: Absolutely. So, the NURSE mnemonic, unlike SPIKES, is not a step-by-step protocol. So, NURSE is a mnemonic, but you don't go through each letter and sort of give a naming statement and then an understanding statement and then a respecting statement and so on. Nurse is really a toolkit of different types of statements that we can give in response to emotions so that when you find yourself in a situation where a patient or family member is tearful, is scared, is angry, is expressing feelings, you have some phrases ready that feel authentic to you and that you feel are going to meet the moment and allow you to empathically respond to those emotions. Because until we do that, we really can't move further in this conversation with our patients and families feeling heard and respected. So, that NURSE mnemonic, those Naming, Understanding, Respecting, Supporting and Exploring statements, are really examples of statements that we can use to meet that moment with empathy and understanding and without implying that we have walked in their shoes. We want to avoid being presumptuous and really focus on just being present and empathic. Dr Monteith: So, let's just kind of run through, I think it's really important. Let's run through some of these examples. Maybe if someone's crying hysterically, how would we respond to that? Dr Besbris: So, this is an opportunity for Naming. And I made this one, I think, in the chart, a little bit obvious, meaning that we recognize when someone is crying that they are feeling probably very sad. This is an opportunity for us to name and thus normalize that emotion. I just think something as simple as, I think anyone would be really sad hearing this. These responses are not intended to fix this emotion. I'm not trying to get someone to stop crying or to, you know, necessarily not feel sad. It's really just to say, yeah, it's normal that you're feeling sad. It's okay. I'm here with you while you're feeling sad. And I'm going to be with you no matter what you're bringing to the table. Dr Monteith: Yeah. Let's go through just a couple of others. I mean, these are really good. Dr Besbris: Sure. Maybe Respecting. Dr Monteith: Yeah. So, my Dad is a fighter. Only God, not doctors, can know the future. Dr Besbris: Yeah. So, I love giving these examples with our learners because these statements, things like my Dad is a fighter or God will bring me a miracle or you don't know the answer. Only God knows what's going to happen, I think that they give a lot of doctors a feeling of confrontation, a feeling of anxiety. And I think there are a few reasons for that. And I think one of the main ones is that they’re statements that imply that we as doctors are not all-powerful and it's our patients or families sort of looking for a different locus of control, whether it's internal fortitude or a higher power. They're looking to something other than us, and maybe that makes us feel a little bit uncomfortable. And I think that sometimes physicians think that these statements imply that someone doesn't even understand what's going on. But maybe they're coming to this from a place of denial. And I would argue that when someone comes to you with a statement like my dad is a fighter or, you know, I'm looking to God to bring me a miracle or to show me the future. I think that what they're really saying is, wow, I'm really hearing that things are serious, so much so that I'm reaching for these other resources to give me strength and hope. I don't think anyone asks for a miracle if they think that a miracle is not needed, if the problem is easy to fix. And so, rather than come to these types of statements from a confrontational place of I'm the doctor and I know best, I think this is a great opportunity to show some respect and give some respecting statements. Your dad is a fighter. I don't think he could have come this far without being a fighter. Or, you know, I am so grateful that you have your faith to lean on during times like these to give you strength. These are also nice opportunities for exploring statements. For example, I'm so grateful to learn more about your dad. Can you tell me what it is that he has been fighting for all of this time? Dr Monteith: I love that. It's like a follow-up, and also validating. Dr Besbris: Yeah, it's validating. And it allows us to learn a little bit more about this person and to learn, well, is he fighting for a life that we can still achieve with our interventions to lead into the next part of a conversation? Or, is God is going to bring me a miracle? Well, tell me what a miracle looks like for you. I can't tell you how many times I thought someone was going to tell me that a miracle would be cure. And sometimes that is what comes up. But other times I hear, a miracle would be, you know, my loved one surviving long enough for the rest of the family to gather. And, you know, that is certainly something we can work towards together. Dr Monteith: So, why don't we talk a little bit about approach to goals of care discussions? They are tough, and let's just put it into perspective to the critical care team. It's time, the person's been in the ICU, the family wants everything thrown at medically. And it's to the point that the assessment is that would be medical futility. Dr Besbris: Lots to unpack there. Dr Monteith: I wanted to make it hard for you. Dr Besbris: No, no, this is good! I mean, this is something- I work in a, you know, almost one thousand-bed hospital with a massive critical care building. And so, these are not unusual circumstances at all. First of all, I would just say that goals of care conversations are not only about end-of-life care. And I make that point a few different times in the article because I think when people imagine goals of care, and one of the reasons that I think clinicians may sometimes shy away from goals of care discussions, is that they think they have to be sad, they have to be scary, they have to be about death and dying. And I would argue that, really, goals of care discussions are about understanding who a person is, how they live their life, what's most important to them. Most of these conversations should be about living. How are we going to together achieve a quality of life that is meaningful for you and treatments that are going to fit your needs and your preferences? But there is a little slice of that pie in the pie chart of goals of care discussions that is in the arena of end-of-life care. For example, ICU care with, really, the highest levels of intensity of care, and having to talk about whether that still is meeting the moment from the perspective of goals as well as the perspective of efficacy. So, from the goals standpoint, I approach these conversations just like any other goals of care conversation. Usually at this point, we're speaking to family members and not our patients because in a neurocritical care unit, if someone is that sick, they probably are incapacitated. And so, it's a moment to really sit down with family and say, please tell me about the human being lying in that bed. They can't introduce themselves. What would they tell me about themselves if they could speak right now? What kinds of things were important to them in the course of their treatment? What kind of a life did they want to live or do they want to live? So that then we can reflect on, well, can our treatment achieve that? And this process is called shared decision making. This is really where we take in data from the family, who are experts in the patient, and then our own expertise in the illness and what our treatments can achieve, and then bring all of that information together to make a recommendation that aligns with what we believe is right for a particular patient. So, in the example that you gave, the extreme circumstance where someone is receiving maximal intensive care and we're starting to reach the point of futility, I think that we need to first really understand, well, what does futility mean for this particular patient? Is it that we as healthcare providers would not value living in the state this person is in? Or is it that the treatments truly cannot physiologically keep them alive or meet their stated goals? If it's the first one, that I wouldn't want to be on machines unconscious, you know, at the end of my life, well, I have to set that aside. It's really about what this patient wants. and if the family is telling you they valued every breath, every moment, and if we have care that can achieve that, we should continue to offer and recommend that care. And as healthcare providers, it is so important that we do explain when treatments are not going to be able to physiologically meet a patient's needs or achieve their goals. And that's where we can say, I'm going to continue to do everything I can, for example, to, you know, keep your loved one here for these meaningful moments. And we are at a point where performing CPR would no longer be able to restart his heart. And I just wanted to let you know that that's not something that we're going to do because I have an obligation not to provide painful medical treatments that will not work. So, my approach to futility is really different than my approach to shared decision-making because in the context of objective futility, it's not about necessarily- it's not about decision-making, it's not about shared decision-making as much as it is explaining why something is simply not going to work. Does that make sense? Dr Monteith: Absolutely. And what I love in your article is that, you know, you go beyond the skills, but also potential communication challenges---for example, patients’ neurologic status, their ability to understand complex communication, or even cultural differences. So, can you speak about that briefly? Dr Besbris: Absolutely. In the world of neurological serious illness, it is incredibly common for our patients to face challenges in communication. That might be because they are aphasic, because they have a motor speech deficit, it might be because they're intubated, it might be because their capacity is diminished or absent. And so, there are a lot of challenges to keeping patients in these conversations. And in the article, I summarize what those challenges can look like and some strategies that we can use to continue to engage our patients in these conversations to the greatest extent possible and also turn to their surrogate decision makers where the patients themselves are no longer able to participate or participate fully. In terms of cultural considerations, I mean, there could be an entire article or an entire Continuum just on cultural considerations in neurology and in serious illness communication. And so, the key points that I really tried to focus on were exploring from a place of cultural humility what the beliefs and practices of a particular patient and family are in their cultural context, to ask questions to help you understand how those cultural differences may impact the way you approach these conversations. And being sensitive to folks with limited English proficiency, to ensure that we are using medical interpreters whenever possible. Dr Monteith: Excellent. Well, there's so much in the article. There's already so much that we just discussed, but our listeners are going to have to go to the article to get the rest of this. I do want to ask you to just kind of reflect on, you know, all the different cases and experiences that you have, and just, if you can give us...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/39184510
info_outline
December 2025 Neuropalliative Care Issue With Dr. Maisha T. Robinson
12/03/2025
December 2025 Neuropalliative Care Issue With Dr. Maisha T. Robinson
In this episode, Lyell K. Jones Jr, MD, FAAN, speaks with Maisha T. Robinson, MD, MSHPM, FAAN, FAAHPM, who served as the guest editor of the December 2025 Neuropalliative Care issue. They provide a preview of the issue, which publishes on December 2, 2025. Dr. Jones is the editor-in-chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology® and is a professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Robinson is the Chair of the Division of Palliative Medicine and an assistant professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. Additional Resources Read the issue: Subscribe to Continuum®: Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: Most of us who see patients with chronic progressive neurologic disease are aware of the value of palliative care. The focus on symptom management and quality of life is a key aspect of helping these patients. But how many of us are comfortable starting the conversation about palliative care or care at the end of life? Today we have the opportunity to speak with a leading expert on neuropalliative care, Dr Maisha Robinson, about how we can better integrate neuropalliative care into our practices. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about subscribing to the journal, listening to verbatim recordings of the articles, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. Today I'm interviewing Dr Maisha Robinson, who is Continuum's Guest Editor for our latest issue of Continuum on neuropalliative care, and our first-ever issue fully dedicated to this topic. Dr Robinson is an assistant professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Florida, where she is Chair of the Division of Palliative Medicine, and she also serves on the AAN Board of Directors as Chair of the Member Engagement Committee. Dr Robinson, welcome. Thank you for joining us today. Why don't you introduce yourself to our listeners? Dr Robinson: Well, Dr Jones, thank you for having me. Really a pleasure to be here. I'm Maisha Robinson at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. I spent my time as a neurohospitalist, a general palliative care physician, and a neuropalliative care physician. Dr Jones: So, this is a topic that at Continuum, we have heard about from subscribers for a long time requesting a fully dedicated issue to palliative care. And we've titled this neuropalliative Care. So, we want to respond to our subscribers and bring them content that they're interested in. I also think that palliative medicine is a big education gap in our specialty of neurology and something that we have room to improve on. So, let's start with the basics, Dr Robinson. Palliative medicine has been around for a long time, but this concept of “neuropalliative care” feels relatively new. What is neuropalliative care? Dr Robinson: That's a great question. Generally, what I would say is palliative care, first of all, is really just a specialty that focuses on trying to improve quality of life for people that have a serious or advanced medical condition. And neuropalliative care is really palliative care for people with neurologic conditions. And you'll see a number of neurologists doing neuropalliative care, but also there are internists as well, and people from other specialties, who focus on patients with neurologic disease and really trying to improve their quality of life. Dr Jones: Got it. And so, it's really the principles of palliative medicine in a specialty-specific context, which I think is important for us given the prevalence of chronic disease in our specialty. And I was obviously reading through these articles in this issue, and in the really wonderful articles, there are some themes that came up multiple times in various different articles. And one of them was obviously the importance of communication with patients and families. I think, and I'm speaking a little bit from personal experience here, many physicians feel uncomfortable bringing up the discussion of palliative care. And I'm sure that is something that reflects on your practice, too. How often do you have a patient who shows up to clinic and they ask you, why am I here? Dr Robinson: It happens all the time, because colleagues who are referring patients are nervous to tell them that they're sending them to palliative care. But we try to tell people it's really just to normalize it, to say that the palliative care team is going to see you, they're going to help with some symptoms, they're going to help you think about big picture, and they're going to be sort of an added layer of support to your team. And I think if people approach it from that standpoint, then patients and family members will say, that sounds great, I need a little extra support. Dr Jones: So, I think most neurologists have a threshold at which they would feel more comfortable having specialty support, having a palliative medicine specialist to help them in symptom management with the patient. For the palliative care that they provide themselves---and we want our subscribers to read this issue and feel more comfortable with delivering some palliative care on their own---how would you encourage them to begin that conversation? How should they initiate that conversation with a patient about working more toward palliative management of symptoms? Dr Robinson: So, one of the things we recommend is really introducing an approach to palliative care very early in the disease process. So, discussions about big picture and goals of care, discussions about who might help make medical decisions if the person can't make them for themselves. Those kinds of things can be discussed very early on. And in fact, that's palliative care. And then they can talk to patients more about the fact that as the disease progresses, there may be an additional team that can help walk along alongside the neurologist in helping you prepare for what's to come. You know, I think it's very important for patients and family members who feel like you're not abandoning them, but you're adding additional resources. And so, I like the way that we often will suggest to people to say partner or collaborate or bring in extra resources with the palliative care team. I think patients and family members will respond to that. Dr Jones: Yeah. So, by talking about it early, you kind of, at least, help to avoid that problem of the patient perceiving the introduction of palliative care as the quote-unquote “giving-up problem.” Is that right? Dr Robinson: Correct. Because we also don't want to see people who are just being referred to us for end-of-life care. Palliative care is about much more than that. But if patients will Google palliative care, they may see hospice come up. And so, introducing the concept early and discussing some palliative topics early will allow the patient and family members to think that, okay, this isn't because I'm at the end of life. This is just because my clinician wants to make sure that I have all the bases covered. Dr Jones: This was also mentioned in several of the articles, the studies that have shown how frequently palliative care is initiated very near the end of life, which is usually, I think, perceived as a missed opportunity, right? To not wait so long to take advantage of what palliative care has to offer. Dr Robinson: That's correct. And the benefit of palliative care is that oftentimes we work alongside an interdisciplinary team, a team that could be quite helpful to patients and their support systems throughout the course of the disease. So, we have chaplains, we have nurses, we often have other clinicians, advanced practice providers as well, who work with us. We have spiritual advisors as well. And the patients and family members could benefit from some of those resources throughout the course of the disease. Who they might need to meet with may vary depending on what the disease is and how they're doing. But there's definitely some benefit to having a longitudinal relationship with the palliative care team and not just seeking them out at the end of life. Dr Jones: So- that's very helpful. So, it'll obviously vary according to an individual provider's level of comfort, right, where they're comfortable providing certain palliative management care versus when they need to have some assistance from a specialist. Are there types of care or are there certain thresholds that you say, wow, this patient really should go see a specialist in palliative medicine or neuropalliative care? Dr Robinson: So, I think that if there are, for instance, refractory symptoms, where the neurologist has been working with a patient for a while trying to manage certain symptoms and they're having some challenges, that person may benefit from being referred to palliative care. If patients are being hospitalized multiple times and frequently, that may suggest that a good serious-illness conversation may be necessary. If there are concerns about long-term artificial nutrition, hydration, or functional and cognitive decline, then some of those patients have benefited from palliative care. Not only the patient, but also the caregiver, because our team really focuses on trying to make sure that we're walking through the course of disease with these patients to ensure that all of the needs are managed both for the patient and the family member. Dr Jones: Got it. And that's very helpful. And I know that we talk about a lot of these decisions happening in an ideal environment when there's good access to the neurologist and good access to a palliative medicine specialist or even a neuropalliative medicine expert. In your general sense, I- and maybe we'll talk a little bit here in a minute or two about the growing interest in neuropalliative care. But in terms of access, in terms of availability of really, truly neuropalliative expertise, what is your sense of how widely available that is in the US? Dr Robinson: There's a shortfall of palliative care clinicians in the United States. Everybody who needs a palliative care clinician won't have access to one. And I think your point about the primary palliative care is so important. That's really what we encourage all clinicians, neurologists, neurosurgeons, even, physiatrists, the neurology care team members need to be comfortable with at least initiating some of these conversations. Because, to your point, not everyone's going to have access to a palliative care physician. But by reading issues such as this one, attending some courses---for instance at the American Academy of Neurology meetings---, doing some online trainings, those types of things can be helpful to bring any neurology clinician up to speed who certainly may not have access to a palliative care physician. Dr Jones: So, I know---and this is in part from my own conversations with patients in my own practice---there are a number of fears that patients have when they have a chronic disease, something that's progressive or something that we don't have a curative treatment for. But I think one of, if not the most common fear among patients is pain, and pain that can't be managed adequately during the course of chronic illness or at the end of life. One of the interesting concepts that I saw mentioned in a few of the articles in this issue is this concept of total pain. So, not just the somatic pain that I think we tend to think of as clinicians and patients tend to think of as patients, but a more holistic definition of pain. Walk us through that and how that relates to palliative medicine. Dr Robinson: So, Dame Cicely Saunders, the modern-day founder of palliative medicine, really described this biopsychosocial model for pain. And so, you're right, it's not just physical pain, but it's psychological pain, it's spiritual pain. And oftentimes when we are taking care of patients with neurologic disease, they may have some physical pain, but a lot of them are thinking about, for instance, the things that they will miss, which may cause some internal discomfort. Things that they're grieving, the life they thought they were going to have, the person that they used to be, the life they used to have, and what they anticipated their life as being. And some of that can cause people to have not only the spiritual discomfort, but also some psychological discomfort as well. And so, when we're thinking about how to provide rehensive care to these patients, we have to be thinking about all of these aspects. Dr Jones: It's really helpful. And I guess the more you can identify those, the more you can either help yourself or find the right expert to help the patient. I thought that was an interesting expansion of, of my view of how to think about pain. And another observation that came up in several of the articles was a lack of high-quality clinical trial evidence to inform a lot of the interventions in neuropalliative care. Some of them are common-sense, some of them are based on clinical experience or expert advice. In your own practice, if there was one key knowledge gap to close---in other words, if there was one pivotal trial that we could do to answer one question in helping patients with chronic neurologic disease---what would you say is the main gap? Dr Robinson: I think the real gap is, who needs palliative care and when? That seems very simple. We have tried things such as automatic triggers for palliative care, for instance, in patients with ALS, or we've said that maybe all glioblastoma patients should see palliative care. But is that true? Are we utilizing the resources in the best possible way that we can? We're not sure. And so, you'll see these practices doing things all a little bit different because we don't have a best practice and it's not really standardized about when people should see palliative care, or why, for instance, they should see palliative care, or who should see palliative care. And I think if we could help drill that down, we can provide some better guidance to our colleagues about when and why and who should see palliative care. Dr Jones: It's a really kind of a fundamental, foundational, who needs the service to begin with or who needs to care. Okay, that's- that is a big gap. So, one of the interesting concepts that I read- and it was in Benzi Kluger's article on neuropalliative care for patients who have movement disorders. I think it's a concept that is interesting, really, maybe in the management of patients with a lot of different chronic, progressive neurologic diseases. And it's this idea of stealing victories or bringing joy to patients. In other words, not just managing or trying to minimize some of the negative aspects or symptoms of disease, but looking for opportunities to bring something positive to their experience or improving their quality of life. Tell us a little more about that, because I think that's something patients would appreciate, but I think neurologists would appreciate that, too. Dr Robinson: Dr Kluger loves to talk about sustaining and finding joy in patients who have really serious or advanced neurologic conditions. He likes to talk about stealing victories, which can relate to the fact that patients and their loved ones can find even some benefit despite having a serious or advanced neurologic condition. Neurologists and neurology clinicians also can steal victories in their patients when they notice, for instance, that they've gained a new skill, and they've lost a skill that they used to love because of the advancing disease. And this is just an opportunity for not only the patients and family members, but also the care providers to recognize that in the midst of decline, there are positive things to be found. Dr Jones: I think it gives patients a sense of maybe reclaimed autonomy when they can say, well, there's maybe nothing I can do to cure this disease in the conventional sense, but I can maybe go on this trip with my family, which has been something I've always wanted to do. Or, I can do these things, so I can attend certain events that I want to. And I think that autonomy and independence aspect of that, I think that I think that was really meaningful and something that I'm going to bring back to my own practice in my care of patients who have ALS, for example. When you think about neuropalliative care---and you've been a leader in this area, Dr Robinson---what do you think the biggest change in neuropalliative care has been over the last few years? Dr Robinson: I think there's a growing cohort of people who are recognizing that there is some benefit in having dedicated specialists who focus on palliative care for patients with neurologic disease. When I said I was going to do neuropalliative care, somebody asked me, why would a neurologist be interested in palliative care? Over the last decade and a half, we've seen that shift. And not only are our colleagues recognizing the benefit, but also patients and caregivers are. Some are even asking for palliative care. I think people are recognizing that not only having their primary neurologist or neurology clinician taking care of them, they have this extra layer of support, and this extra team really focused on quality-of-life issues can be beneficial. Dr Jones: So, one of the things that I think you and I have both seen, Dr Robinson, is a growing interest among neurology trainees in palliative medicine. And maybe that's anecdotal, but in my own practice, I've seen more and more trainees express an interest in this. For neurology residents who are interested in this as a component of or maybe a focus of their career, what would you recommend to them? How should they go about this? Dr Robinson: Yes, it used to be that every neurology resident interested in palliative care would call me or email me or send me a message, but now there are so many that I can't keep up. We're excited about the growing number of people interested in neuropalliative care. What I would say to those people is that you can really try to hone your skills by, for instance, doing a rotation with the palliative care team at your hospital, if there is one. If there isn't one, you might even ask to spend some time with the local hospice agency, which may be helpful to you. If you're attending some of the national meetings---for instance, the American Academy of Neurology meeting---you may want to go to a course and learn a little bit about palliative care. There are a couple that are offered every year. There is an education opportunity for education in palliative and end-of-life care as well. And so, there are a number of resources that you can find in addition to this issue of Continuum as well. Dr Jones: I find it gratifying that trainees ask about this. And I'm sorry, I think I've probably sent a bunch of trainees your way for advice about this, and you've been incredibly generous with your time and expertise. So, I find it very gratifying that our neurology trainees are interested in this area, because it's an important area of medicine. It's also probably a challenging practice just from the cognitive load and the emotional load of caring for patients who are moving through a progressive illness. What is your thinking about how to have a sustainable career in palliative medicine? What is your approach to that? Is it for everyone? Dr Robinson: Yeah, the issue with palliative care is that we do see some very challenging situations, and frankly some very sad situations. But I actually love what I do because I think that we're helping patients and their family...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/39184480
info_outline
Dystrophinopathies With Dr. Divya Jayaraman
11/26/2025
Dystrophinopathies With Dr. Divya Jayaraman
Dystrophinopathies are heritable muscle disorders caused by pathogenic variants in the DMD gene, leading to progressive muscle breakdown, proximal weakness, cardiomyopathy, and respiratory failure. Diagnosis and management are evolving areas of neuromuscular neurology. In this episode, Kait Nevel, MD, speaks with Divya Jayaraman, MD, PhD, an author of the article “Dystrophinopathies” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Nevel is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a neurologist and neuro-oncologist at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, Indiana. Dr. Jayaraman is an assistant professor of neurology and pediatrics in the division of child neurology at the Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, New York. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Nevel: Hello, this is Dr Kate Nevel. Today I'm interviewing Dr Divya Jayaraman about her article on dystrophinopathies, which she wrote with Dr Partha Ghosh. This article appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Divya, welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to the audience. Dr Jayaraman: Thank you so much, Dr Nevel. My name is Divya, and I am an assistant professor of Neurology and Pediatrics at Columbia University Irving Medical Center, and also an attending physician in the Pediatric Neuromuscular program there. In that capacity, I see patients with pediatric neuromuscular disorders and also some general pediatric neurology patients and also do research, primarily clinical research and clinical trials on pediatric neuromuscular disorders. Dr Nevel: Wonderful. Thank you for sharing that background with us. To set us on the same page for our discussion, before we get into some more details of the article, perhaps, could you start with some definitions? What comprises the dystrophinopathies? What are some of the core features? Dr Jayaraman: So, the dystrophinopathies, I like that term because it is a smaller subset from the muscular dystrophies. The dystrophinopathies are a spectrum of clinical phenotypes that are all associated with mutations in the DMD gene on chromosome X. So, that includes DMD---or, Duchenne muscular dystrophy---, Becker muscular dystrophy, intermediate muscular dystrophy (which falls in between the two), dilated cardiomyopathy, asymptomatic hyperCKemia, and manifesting female carriers. In terms of the core features of these conditions, so, there's some variability, weakness being prominent in Duchenne and also Becker. The asymptomatic hyperCKemia, on the other hand, may have minimal symptoms and might be found incidentally by just having a high CK on their labs. They all will have some degree of elevated CK. The dilated cardiomyopathy patients, and also the Becker patients to a lesser degree, will have cardiac involvement out of proportion to skeletal muscle involvement, and then the manifesting carriers likewise can have elevated CK and prominent cardiac involvement as well as some milder weakness. Dr Nevel: Now that we have some definitions, for the practicing neurologists out there, what do you think is the most important takeaway from your article about the dystrophinopathies? Dr Jayaraman: I like this question because it suggests that there's something that, really, any neurologist could do to help us pick up these patients sooner. And the big takeaway I want everyone to get from this is to check the CK, or creatine kinase, level. It's a simple, cheap, easy test that anyone can order, and it really helps us a lot in terms of setting the patient on the diagnostic odyssey. And in terms of whom you should be thinking about checking a CK in, obviously patients who present with some of the classic clinical features of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. This would include young boys who have toe walking, as they're presenting, sign; or motor delayed, delayed walking. They may have calf hypertrophy, which is what we say nowadays. You might have seen calf pseudohypertrophy in your neurology textbooks, but we just say calf hypertrophy now. Or patients can often have a Gowers sign or Gowers maneuver, which is named after a person called Gowers who described this phenomenon where the child will basically turn over and use their hands on the floor to stand up, usually with a wide-based gait, and then they'll sort of march their hands up their legs. That's the sort of classic Gowers maneuver. There are modified versions of that as well. So, if anyone presents with this classic presentation, for sure the best first step is to check a CK. But I would also think about checking a CK for some atypical cases. For example, any boy with any kind of motor or speech delay for whom you might not necessarily be thinking about a muscle disorder, it's always good practice to check a CK. Even a boy with autism for whom you may not get a good clinical exam. This patient might present to a general pediatric neurology clinic. I always check a CK in those patients, and you'll pick up a lot of cases that way. For the adult folks in particular, the adult neurologist, a female patient could show up in your clinic with asymptomatic hyperCKemia. And I think it's an important differential to think about for them because this could have implications not just for their own cardiac risks, but also for their family planning. Dr Nevel: So, tell us a little bit more about the timing of diagnosis. Biggest takeaway: check a CK if this is anywhere on your radar, even if somewhat of an atypical case. Why is it so important to get kiddos started on that diagnostic odyssey, as you called it, early? Dr Jayaraman: This is especially important for kids because if they especially get a Duchenne muscular dystrophy diagnosis, you might be making them eligible for treatments that we've had for some time, and also treatments that were not available earlier that hinge on making that diagnosis. So, for example, people may be skeptical about steroids, but there's population data to suggest that initiation and implementation of steroids could delay the onset of loss of ambulation as much as three years. So, you don't want to deprive patients of the chance to get that. And then all the newer emerging therapies---which we'll be talking about later, I'm sure---require a Duchenne muscular dystrophy diagnosis. So, that's why it's so important to check a CK, have this on your radar, and then get them to a good specialist. Dr Nevel: I know that you alluded already, or shared a few of the kind of exam paroles or findings among patients with dystrophinopathy. But could you share with us a little bit more how you approach these patients in the clinic who are presenting with muscle weakness, perhaps? And how do you approach this or think about this in terms of ways to potentially differentiate between a dystrophinopathy versus another cause of motor weakness or delay? Dr Jayaraman: It's helpful to think through the neuraxis and what kinds of disorders can present along that neuraxis. A major differential that I'm always thinking about when I'm seeing a child with proximal weakness is spinal muscular atrophy, which is a genetic anterior horn cell disorder that can also present in this age group. And some of the key differences there would be things like reflexes. So, you should have dropped reflexes in spinal muscular atrophy. In DMD, surprisingly, they might have preserved Achilles reflexes even if their patellar reflexes are lost. It may only be much later that they go on to lose their Achilles reflex. So, if you can get an Achilles reflex, that's quite reassuring, and if you cannot, then you need to be thinking about spinal muscular atrophy. They can both have low muscle tone and can present quite similarly, including with proximal weakness, and can even have neck flexion weakness. So, this is an important distinction to make. The reason for that is, obviously there are treatments for both conditions, but for spinal muscular atrophy, timing is very, very important. Time is motor neurons, so the sooner you make that diagnosis the better. Other considerations would be the congenital muscular dystrophies. So, for those that they tend to present a lot younger, like in infancy or very early on, and they can have much, much higher CKS in that age range than a comparable Duchenne or Becker muscular dystrophy patient. They can also have other involvement of the central nervous system that you wouldn't see in the dystrophinopathies, for example. My mnemonic for the congenital muscular dystrophies is muscle-eye-brain disease, which is one of the subtypes. So, you think about muscle involvement, eye involvement, and brain involvement. So, they need an ophthalmology valve. They can have brain malformations, which you typically don't see in the dystrophinopathies. I think those are some of the major considerations that I have. Obviously, it's always good to think about the rest of the neuraxis as well. Like, could this be a central nervous system process? Do they have upper motor neuron signs? But that's just using all of your exam tools as a neurologist. Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely. So, let's say you have a patient in clinic and you suspect they may have a dystrophinopathy. What is your next diagnostic step after your exam? Maybe you have an elevated CK and you've met with the patient. What comes next? Dr Jayaraman: Great question. So, after the CK, my next step is to go to genetics. And this is a bit of a change in practice over time. In the past we would go from the CK to the muscle biopsy before genetic testing was standard. And I think now, especially in kids, we want to try and spare them invasive procedures where possible. So, genetic testing would be the next step. There are a few no-charge, sponsored testing programs for the dystrophinopathies and also for some of the differential diagnosis that I mentioned. And I think we'll be including links to websites for all of these in the final version of the published article. So, those are a good starting point for a genetic workup. It's really important to know that, you know, deletions and duplications are a very common type of mutation in the DMD gene. And so, if you just do a very broad testing, like whole exome, you might miss some of those duplications and deletions. And it's important to include both checking for duplications and deletions, and also making sure that the DMD gene is sequenced. So always look at whatever genetic test you're ordering and making sure that it's actually going to do what you want it to do. After genetics, I think that the sort of natural question is, what if things are not clear after the genetics for some reason? We still use biopsy in this day and age, but we save it for those cases where it's not entirely clear or maybe the phenotype is a little bit discordant from the genotype. So, for mutations that disrupt the reading frame, those tend to cause Duchenne muscular dystrophy, whereas mutations that preserve the reading frame tend to cause Becker muscular dystrophy. There are some important exceptions to this, which is where muscle biopsy can be especially helpful in sorting it out. So, for example, there are some early mutations early in the DMD gene where, basically, they find an alternate start codon or an initiation codon to continue with transcription and translation. So, you end up forming a largely functional, somewhat truncated protein that gives you more of a milder Becker phenotype. On the other hand, you can have some non-frameshift or inframe mutations that preserve the reading frame, but because they disrupt a very key domain in the protein that's really crucial for its function, you can actually end up with a much more severe Duchennelike phenotype. So, for these sorts of cases, you might know a priori you're dealing with them, but might just be a child who is who you think has DMD has a mutation that's showed up on testing. There isn't enough in the literature to point you one way or another, but they look maybe a little milder than you would expect. That would be a good kid to do a biopsy in because there are treatment decisions that hinge on this. There are treatments that are only for Duchenne that someone with a milder phenotype would not be eligible for. Dr Nevel: So, that kind of stepwise approach, but maybe not all kids need a muscle biopsy is what I'm hearing from you. If it's a mutation that's been well-described in the literature to be fitting with Duchenne, for example. Dr Jayaraman: Absolutely. Dr Nevel: So, after you confirm the diagnosis through genetic testing---and let's say, you know, whether or not you do a muscle biopsy or not, after you know the diagnosis is a dystrophinopathy---how do you counsel the families and your patients? What are the most important points to relay to families, especially in that initial phase where the diagnosis is being made? Dr Jayaraman: This is a lot of what we do in pediatric neurology in general, right? So, I actually picked up this approach from the pediatric hematology oncology specialists at Boston Children's. They had this concept of a day-zero conversation, which is the day that you disclose the life-changing diagnosis or potentially, at some point, terminal diagnosis to a family. And some of the key components of that are a not beating around the bush, telling them what the diagnosis is, and then letting them have whatever emotional response they're going to have in the moment. And you may not get much further than that, but honestly, you want them to take away, this is what my child has. I did not do anything to cause this, nor could I have done anything to prevent this. Because often for these genetic conditions, there's a lot of guilt, a lot of parental guilt. So, you want to try and assuage that as much as possible. And then to know that they're not going to be alone on this journey; that, you know, they don't have to have it all figured out right then, but we can always come back and answer any questions they have. There's going to be a whole team of specialists. We're going to help the family and the kid manage this condition. Those are sort of my big takeaways that I want them to get. Dr Nevel: Right. And that segues into my next question, which is, who is part of that team? I know that these teams that help take care of people with dystrophinopathies and other muscle disorders can be very large teams that span multiple specialists. Can you talk a little bit more about that for this group of patients? Dr Jayaraman: Of course. So, the neuromuscular neurologist, really, our role is in coordinating the diagnosis, the initiation of any disease-specific treatments, and coordinating care with a whole group of specialists. So, we're sort of at the center of that, but everyone else is equally important. So, the other specialists include physical therapists; occupational therapists; rehab doctors or physiatrists; orthotists who help with all of the many braces and other devices that they might need, wheelchairs; pulmonology, of course, for managing the respiratory manifestations of this. It becomes increasingly important over time, and they are involved early on to help monitor for impending respiratory problems. Cardiac manifestations, this is huge and something that you should be thinking about even for your female carriers, the mother of the patient you're seeing in the clinic, or your patient who comes to adult clinic with asymptomatic hyperCKemia. if you end up making a diagnosis of DMD carrier for those patients, or if you make a Becker diagnosis, the cardiac surveillance is even more important because the cardiac involvement can be out of proportion to the skeletal muscle weakness. And of course, extremely important for the Duchenne patients as well. Endocrinologists are hugely important because in the course of treating patients with steroids, we end up giving them a lot of iatrogenic endocrinologic complications. Like they might have delayed puberty, they might have loss of growth, of height; and of course metabolic syndrome. So, endocrinology is hugely important. They're also important in managing things like fracture prevention, osteoporosis, prescribing bisphosphonates if necessary. Nutrition and GI are also important, not just later on when they might need assistance to take in nutrition, whether that's through tube feeds, but also earlier on when we're trying to manage the weight. Orthopedics, of course, for the various orthopedic complications that patients develop. And then finally, a word must be said for social work and behavioral and mental health specialists, because a lot of this patient population has a lot of mental health challenges as well. Dr Nevel: After you give the diagnosis, you've counseled the patient and families and you've had those kind of initial phase discussions, the day-zero discussion, when you start getting into discussions or thoughts about management, disease-specific medication. But what are the main categories of the treatment options, and maybe how do you kind of approach deciding between treatment options for your patients? Dr Jayaraman: So, there are two broad categories that I like to think about. So, one is the oral corticosteroids and oral histone deacetylase, or HDAC inhibitors, which share the common characteristic that they are non-mutation specific. And within corticosteroids, patients now have a choice between just Prednisone or Prednisolone, or Deflazacort or Vermilion. The oral HDAC inhibitors are newly FDA-approved as a nonsteroidal therapy in addition to corticosteroids in DMD patients above six years of age. I would say we're in the early phase of adoption of this in clinical practice. And then the other big category of treatment options would be the genetic therapies as a broad bucket, and this would include gene therapy or gene replacement therapy, of which the most famous is the microdystrophin gene therapy that was FDA-approved first on an accelerated approval basis for ages four to eight, and then a full approval in that age group as well as an accelerated approval for all comers, essentially, with DMD. This is obviously controversial. Different centers approach this a bit differently. I think our practice at our site has been to focus on the ambulatory population, just thinking about risk versus benefit, because the risks are not insignificant. So really this is something that should be done by experienced sites that have the bandwidth and the wherewithal to counsel patients through all of this and to manage complications as they arise with regular monitoring. And then another class that falls within this broader category would be the Exon-skipping therapies. So as the name suggests, they are oligonucleotides that cause an Exon to be skipped. The idea is, if there is a mutation in a particular Exon that causes a frame shift, and there's an adjacent Exon that you can force skipping of, then the resulting protein, when you splice the two ends together, will actually allow restoration of the reading frame. I think the picture I want to paint is that there's a wide range of options that we present to families, not all of which everyone will be eligible for. And they all have different risk profiles. And I really think the choice of a particular therapy has to be a risk-benefit decision and a shared decision-making...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133340
info_outline
Myotonic Dystrophy With Dr. Paloma Gonzalez Perez
11/19/2025
Myotonic Dystrophy With Dr. Paloma Gonzalez Perez
Myotonic dystrophies (DM), in addition to muscle weakness and myotonia, are associated with broad and variable multiorgan involvement. Neurologists need to recognize DM to ensure prompt diagnosis, effective symptom management, and prevention of life-threatening events. In this episode, Casey Albin, MD, speaks with Paloma Gonzalez Perez, MD, PhD, author of the article “Myotonic Dystrophy” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Albin is a Continuum® Audio interviewer, associate editor of media engagement, and an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Gonzalez Perez is an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Albin: Hello everyone, this is Dr Casey Albin. Today I'm interviewing Dr Paloma Gonzalez-Perez about her article on myotonic dystrophy, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Welcome to the podcast, Dr Gonzalez-Perez. I'd love for you to introduce yourself to our listeners. Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Thank you very much for the invitation. My name is Paloma Gonzalez-Perez. I'm a neuromuscular neurologist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston since 2018. And I'm originally from Spain. I did residency there and also here in Iowa City. And then I did the neuromuscular fellowship here at Mass General Brigham, and then I stayed here as a faculty. So, my focus is myopathies, and more specifically muscular dystrophies, and more particularly myotonic dystrophy, which is what we are going to talk today. Dr Albin: Wonderful. And this is a really fantastic tour de force article about myotonic dystrophy. And in reading your article, it really did stand out to me that these myotonic dystrophies are probably under-recognized. And so, I was hoping that, just to start, you could tell us a little bit about, what is a myotonic dystrophy, and how should we sort of situate that within the larger context of all muscular dystrophies? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Yes, so muscular dystrophies, we have many of them, right? And mostly affecting the skeletal muscle. And basically, the definition of muscular dystrophy is a genetic or inherited muscle disease that causes a progressive muscle weakness. And also, in the muscle biopsies of patients with muscular dystrophies, we see some fractures that are characteristic of this category of muscle diseases, such as, for example, the nuclei of the muscle fibers are in the center---that’s what we call internal nuclei---or maybe fat infiltration or increased connective tissue or a variability in the size of the muscle fibers. So, now in the last few years, the genetic testing is more accessible to us. So, we don't need muscle biopsies all the time to diagnose patients with muscular dystrophy. So many times, we go directly to genetic testing. And this is basically the category of muscular dystrophies. Myotonic dystrophy is very fascinating muscular dystrophy in the sense that many times not only affect the skeletal muscle, but other organs can be affected. And it is true that other muscular dystrophies can affect other organs such as, for example, the brain and the heart, which is something that we always have in mind as a clinician to make sure this muscular dystrophy affect the heart or affect the brain, because it is important for patient care. But myotonic dystrophy actually can affect any organ in the body. I think it is one of these muscular dystrophies in which there is a multisystem involvement of the body. So, the immune, immunological system can be affected and the endocrine system can be affected, the GI system can be affected. In addition to, obviously, to the brain, to the heart, to the skeletal muscle. And sometimes that is why it is under-recognized because of course, if there is a very severe phenotype, maybe the patient comes very easily to a neurologist who is very familiar with myotonic dystrophy. But if the phenotype is a little bit milder, and maybe it doesn't affect much the skeletal muscle. So, these patients probably are in the care of other specialists, such as, for example cardiology or GI doctors, and obviously these specialists are not really aware of this muscular dystrophy. So, I think it is a complex disease because it is very variable in phenotype, can affect many organs and can be also mild. Dr Albin: That is fantastic. That is just a wonderful overview of, really, muscular dystrophy. One of the things I was really curious about: the name includes myotonia. Is myotonia, like, always present, or is that a little bit misleading? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Yeah. I would say that it is a little bit misleading---maybe not too much in myotonic dystrophy type one, because it is true that in adults with myotonic dystrophy type one, many times they have the myotonia, but not many times they complain about the myotonia. This is the thing. So, it is a diagnostic clue that we have at bedside when we ask the patient, for example, to squeeze the hands and then release and we see the myotonia there. And then, obviously, this can actually give you the diagnosis at bedside, but the patients usually don't come to the clinic complaining of this myotonia, which is delaying the relaxation of the muscles. Sometimes they don't- they are not bothered by that. They don't need treatment for that. But it is a very important clue at bedside. I have to say, adults, myotonic dystrophy type one, because the congenital myotonic dystrophy type one you don't see myotonia, clinical myotonia. These babies, right, are born with severe muscle weakness and we don't see myotonia. And then myotonic dystrophy type two, many patients don't have clinical myotonia. And then, you know, the absence of myotonia, the absence of this delay in the muscle relaxation doesn't rule out a myotonic dystrophy, and especially doesn't rule out a myotonic dystrophy type two. Dr Albin: Fantastic. So probably is going to be a feature of the adult-onset type one. May or may not be present in type two. And then the congenital forum where children are presenting as infants, they're not going to tell you that, oh, I have delayed relaxation. That's not going to be part of that. Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Exactly. Dr Albin: This is one of those things that I think, unless you're in neuromuscular clinic, you might not think to ask people about. Maybe the patient isn't actually saying, oh, I have this delayed reaction. How do you get them to give you that history? Like, what are the questions that you ask? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Sometimes I will say, do your hands get locked? You know, this could be the first question that they noticed something there, and then they can give you maybe the clue. But actually, it's the exam more than the question. I will say it’s more do the exam and, you know, intentionally test for myotonia. And you test for spontaneous myotonia and percussion myotonia. So spontaneous myotonia, we tell the patient to squeeze the hands very strongly and then open the hands quickly. And then if they cannot open the hands quickly, this is a delay in muscle relaxation. We call it grip myotonia, spontaneous grip myotonia. Or sometimes close your eyes very, very, very strongly and then open the eyes quickly. And if they have this delay in the eye opening, we call it eyelid myotonia. This eye is spontaneous myotonia, you don't touch the patient and you don't use your hammer yet. And then if we don't find anything, we go to the hammer. We use our reflex hammer, and then we try to test for percussion myotonia. And sometimes we with the reflect hammer, we tap the thinner eminence of the hand, and we can see that you tap, there is a contraction, and then the thumb goes up and then takes a while to go down again. It is a delay in the relaxation of the thinner eminence muscles. Or sometimes in the posterior aspect of the forearm, if we tap the extensor digitorum communis muscle. Again, so, there is a contraction of that muscle, the fingers go up and then take a while to go down. It is also a perfusion myotonia of the extensor digitorum communis muscle. Sometimes people do it even in the tongue. I don't do that because could be very painful. But you can, you know, use a tongue depressor and put it in the tongue, and you tap the tongue depressor and sometimes there is contraction of the tongue, which can be very painful. I don't do it. So- but this is the perfusion myotonia, that can give you also a clue. Dr Albin: That's fantastic. I think this is one of the most memorable things that I saw in pediatric neurology. I remember very distinctly a kid coming in, and then us also examining the mother and having that delayed relaxation. And just one of those really great neurologic exams, those little findings to tuck away to really make a diagnosis, recognizing that not all patients with muscular dystrophy or myotonic dystrophy will have that finding. But so beautiful. And I think that's a really great explanation. And I will also direct our listeners, if you are a Continuum subscriber, she has some really wonderful videos in her article from the EMG sounds of this, which is another layer of being able to appreciate the physical exam finding. One of the things that I was really struck by, and that you've already mentioned, is that there is this really incredible spectrum of disease. That some of the myotonic dystrophy patients may barely have any skeletal involvement, and the ones with congenital myotonic dystrophy may have significant mortality even within the first year of life. Given how many subtypes of this disease there are in that varied presentation, let's just walk through sort of starting with congenital myotonic dystrophy. What are some of the clues to that diagnosis? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Yes. So, you know, these babies with congenital myotonic dystrophy, actually when they are born, the phenotype is what we call a floppy baby. Floppy baby syndrome right? So, they are very weak. There is generalized weakness, including the swallowing muscles and the respiratory muscles. So sometimes, you know, these patients, these babies have to be intubated---to have a feeling tube, right---to survive. So, that's why the mortality can be so high during the first year of life, because obviously swallowing and breathing is affected because the muscle, those muscles, are also affected. So, one of the clues, actually- you know, sometimes these patients may have, like, a tented mouth, which could be a sign of congenital myotonic dystrophy. The differential diagnosis for a floppy baby syndrome is very broad and can be caused by central nervous system problems or peripheral nervous system problems. So, it's very broad, but maybe the tented mouth can be a clue to suspect the congenital myotonic dystrophy type one. And I will say that also, examine the mom. Because sometimes the mom is not diagnosed with myotonic dystrophy, and as simple as going into the mom who is an adult and can have already the myotonia that we talked about before and maybe, you know, try to do, like, a grip myotonia, eyelid myotonia, or use your reflex hammer and tap a few muscles, and then can give you the diagnosis of potential congenital myotonic dystrophy in the baby. And I have to say that there is no newborn screening for myotonic dystrophy type one yet. Maybe in the future it's going to be, but not at this time. So, I'm pretty sure that pediatricians probably rule out other things before unless there is distinctive mouth or unless the mom is affected. Dr Albin: Great pearls about how to take it to the bedside and try to look for that hereditary nature of this. Let's move up a little bit in sort of the childhood and adolescent onset. What are some of the clues that you're seeing for those children who come to presentation a bit later in life, but still probably more likely to be seen in pediatric clinic? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Yes. So, the childhood and adolescent onset in myotonic dystrophy type one, it is interesting because the skeletal muscle may not be the organ that is more affected or the organ that impacts the life of the patient and the family of the patient. So, it's- the phenotype is predominantly focused on behavioral and intellectual disabilities. They may develop at some point myotonia, and they may develop also muscle weakness. But for the most part they are ambulatory. They eat by themselves, they breathe okay, and there is not too much problem with the skeletal muscle, but mostly with behavioral problems such as, for example, ADHD or intellectual disability. So, they may need some help in school and things like that. So, it is more, I will say, a central nervous system phenotype at this age. Dr Albin: Yeah, I love that that this is- to me, this was part of the complexity of this was that, while we call it myotonic dystrophy, the muscle part of this disease really may not be the main issue for the patients and their families. And that we're actually looking for something that involves the central nervous system, endocrine system, GI system. And knowing that maybe the muscle is not the main problem here, why is it so important that these patients actually get the correct diagnosis? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Exactly. So, it is very important. And I always think about the heart. You know, the heart can be affected in the sense like the rhythm of the heart can be abnormal. And sometimes, you know, the patient doesn't have symptoms. But it's important to detect this because, you know, an abnormal rhythm in the heart can cause sudden death. So that's why it's so important. The diagnosis of this muscular dystrophy at this time, and of course in the future when we have a treatment, right, will be very important also to have the diagnosis, the earlier is the better, because probably the treatment is going to be more effective in the earlier stages than in the later stages. But I will say that right now making sure that the heart is in a good shape and the patient has a cardiologist on board if they have myotonic dystrophy. And also, you know, there are consensus-based care recommendations for myotonic dystrophy type one for the pediatric population and the adult population, and also for myotonic dystrophy type two for the adult population, that are published. And I also included in the chapter because they are very important to look for things that maybe the patient it doesn't complain about, but it's important to look for them in the case that we can prevent some future complications. Dr Albin: Absolutely. I really love that. This is a systemic disease that has multiple manifestations, and while the skeletal muscle involvement may or may not be causing problems, we really do have to get the right diagnosis, particularly as it impacts the heart and preventing fatal cardiac arrhythmias. Up to this point, we've mostly been talking about type one myotonic dystrophy. What sets type two apart? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Yes. So, type two is, I think, even more under-recognized, probably because the phenotype is even more variable than type one and can be much milder in some sense. We are not aware of, you know, like, there are some pediatric cases that have been reported, but for the most part it’s an adult muscular dystrophy, type two. So, we diagnose these muscular dystrophies usually in the forties, fifties. The thing is, like, sometimes patients actually may only have muscle pain. And not even muscle weakness. And so… and actually some of these patients may receive a diagnosis of fibromyalgia, for example, just because of the muscle pain. And it is more difficult to obtain myotonia on exam, actually. I think there is a delay in diagnosis in this population, and also the multisystem involvement, which is present but maybe even more variable than that in type one. And we have less patients, so we understand less the phenotype of these patients. But for the most part it is, I think, more under-recognized in the type one. Dr Albin: Fascinating. So again, could have pretty mild skeletal involvement and may just have cramps and muscle pain. So, you have to be really sort of mindful of keeping this on the differential for people with multiple areas of pain in the muscles. When is this suspected? Are you usually sending genetic tests to confirm? How do we get to the diagnosis? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: In the history, in the past medical history, you have probably- sometimes you have the clue. For example, a patient with muscle pain, imagine like for example a forty-eight-year-old male with muscle pain comes to the clinic, and then he tells you that he had cataract surgery at the age of twenty. And then you see a CK that is a little bit more elevated than usual. And then at that time I will go for genetic testing right away, for my myotonic dystrophy type two. Because of the muscle pain is so characteristic of myotonic dystrophy type two, and the multiorgan involvement sometimes includes a very early cataracts, the same as in type one. But the muscle pain is much more typical for type two than for type one. So, that's why I will go, in this specific scenario to type two. If I still think that my alternative dystrophic type two is a possibility, although I'm not totally convinced if it is or not, I usually go for EMG. I mean, if you don't see myotonia at the side, maybe with the EMG and the needle in the muscle, you can see this electrical myotonia that I have some videos in the chapter to see if there is this motorcycle sound of the electrical discharges from the muscle that are consistent with- they can be seen in myotonic dystrophy type two. They are not as specific, but can be seen in myotonic dystrophy type two. So if I have a patient with muscle pain and then I see this electrical myotonia on EMG, so then I will go then next to a genetic testing for myotonic dystrophy type two. Sometimes if there are some family history, it gives you also clues about the possibility of myotonic dystrophy in general, but also myotonic dystrophy type two. Myotonic dystrophy type two, usually the muscle weakness, when it is present, it's more proximal. While in myotonic dystrophy type one it’s more distal. So, this also, you know, helps you to differentiate. But specifically in this myotonic dystrophy area, I think the past medical history helps you a lot and the family history helps you too. If you see an autosomal dominant inheritance of muscle or other organ problems, you suspect this type of muscular dystrophy. And I have low threshold to test for this if it is possible because, as we mentioned before, knowing what the patient has helps a lot in their care. Dr Albin: Absolutely. I love that. Spoken like a true neurologist, using the history, the physical, thinking about the family history, using EMG as an extension of our physical to really find and clinch that diagnosis, and then using genetic tests as a confirmation to get to the right answer. I love the mention of early-onset cataract. Are there any other things that pop into your mind or when you're reading the chart and you look at the medical history that, like cataracts, stand out to you as, this really clues me into myotonic dystrophy? Dr Gonzalez-Perez: Yes. So, for example, a pacemaker at early age---in their thirties, in their forties---; a family history of sudden...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133305
info_outline
Muscle Channelopathies and Rhabdomyolysis with Dr. Hani Kushlaf
11/12/2025
Muscle Channelopathies and Rhabdomyolysis with Dr. Hani Kushlaf
Genetic variants that underlie skeletal muscle channelopathies and rhabdomyolysis can also cause persistent and progressive muscle weakness. The availability and expanded use of genetic testing allows for the identification of new genes causing periodic paralysis and rhabdomyolysis. In this episode, Teshamae Monteith, MD, FAAN speaks with Hani Kushlaf, MD, MS, FAAN, author of the article “Muscle Channelopathies and Rhabdomyolysis” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Monteith is the associate editor of Continuum® Audio and an associate professor of clinical neurology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine in Miami, Florida. Dr. Kushlaf is a professor of neurology and pathology as well as the director of the Neuromuscular Division, director of Neuromuscular Research, and director of the Neuromuscular Medicine Fellowship in the Department of Neurology and Rehabilitation Medicine and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine in Cincinnati, Ohio. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith. Today I'm interviewing Dr Hani Kushlaf about his article on muscle channelopathies and rhabdomyolysis, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Hi, Hani. How are you? Dr Kushlaf: Good. How are you doing? Thank you for having me. Dr Monteith: Well, thank you for coming on our podcast. So why don't you introduce yourself? Dr Kushlaf: So, I'm Hani Kushlaf. I'm a professor of Neurology and Pathology in the Department of Neurology and Rehabilitation Medicine at the University of Cincinnati in Cincinnati, Ohio. Dr Monteith: And what got you interested in muscle disorders? Dr Kushlaf: So, this is a long story. At first in residency, I was interested in epilepsy, but the moment I started doing a rotation in neuromuscular, I became enamored with neuromuscular disorders. I remember seeing the first patient in the rotation who had myofibrillar myopathy, and I found out that there is very little known about muscle disease at the time. So, I became very interested and I immediately changed direction as I started doing nerve conduction studies and EMGs and having that procedure base, I just decided that I want to pursue neuromuscular disorders. Dr Monteith: Well, that doesn't sound like a long story. It sounds like love at first sight. Dr Kushlaf: Yes, I think part of it is not very far from neuromuscular disorders and that it does have some electrophysiology involved. But muscle disease and nerve disorders, they need that detailed neurologic examination, which I love in terms of doing the localization exercise. Dr Monteith: Great. So why don't we talk about the objectives of your article? Dr Kushlaf: This article was written to review muscle channelopathies that include myotonic disorders and periodic paralysis, and also rhabdomyolysis, with emphasis on genetic causes of rhabdomyolysis more than acquired causes. Dr Monteith: So, why was this update so important? Dr Kushlaf: I think this area of muscle disorders hasn't seen a lot of progress in recent years, but there are interesting findings that we're learning that spark, hopefully, more research into the area, because we do have significant gaps that are related to understanding pathophysiology of some of these disorders. For example, in patients with periodic paralysis, it's clearly known now that these patients over time develop muscle weakness, and the muscle weakness is unrelated to how many episodes of weakness they have---basically, the episodic paralysis part of the disease. So, this is an important finding that I think we need to look more into it and understand that these disorders actually progress, even though that they may not have episodes of paralysis. In addition, there are genetic therapies that have been introduced into most of neuromuscular medicine at this time, including muscle disorders, while this specific part of muscle diseases has not had that luxury yet. And I'm hoping over time that there will be an introduction of gene therapies for these diseases. Dr Monteith: Great. So, it sounds like there's some clinical advances, then, as well as genetic advances. Now, you also spoke about rhabdomyolysis and that there's newer ways of thinking about that from perhaps when I was in residency. So why don't you update me on these newer approaches? Dr Kushlaf: The rhabdomyolysis… first, the definition of it is changing. We used to use a cut off, a CK of about a thousand, to call it rhabdomyolysis. And very recently it's clear that that level of CK is not sufficient to call it rhabdomyolysis. So, now the level went up in terms of exertion of rhabdomyolysis, up to ten thousand, has to be more than ten thousand. And in patients who haven't had exercise, the level is up to five thousand. So, it's no longer actually one thousand. And that refinement in the definition is important because there are some patients who exercise all the time and they may exercise at an athletic level and they have very high CK's. And those patients should not be labeled as having rhabdomyolysis. Basically, they are doing strenuous physiologic exercise. In addition, not only the definition of rhabdomyolysis is changing, it is our approach to which disorders to consider first and how we should work up patients with rhabdomyolysis. So, acquired rhabdomyolysis remains the most important etiology to be ruled out first. So, I always tell my fellows and residents that, think about acquired rhabdomyolysis first before you think about the genetic disorder. After you rule out the fact that it is not a toxic or metabolic or medication-induced rhabdomyolysis, then think about a genetic etiology. But when you get that consultation from the hospital that the patient has rhabdomyolysis and we want you to figure it out, always look at the medication list and make sure that there isn't anything on it that causes, actually, a rhabdomyolysis. And in many instances, you find out that it's actually a toxic or metabolic etiology for the rhabdomyolysis. And as part of this article, there's also an acronym that's now being used to identify those patients who would benefit from genetic testing. The acronym is called RHABDO. It's as is the word, RHABDO. R refers to Recurrent exertion of rhabdomyolysis. So, it's not just one episode. And the H refers to HyperCKemia, and the hyperCKemia should persist more than eight weeks after the episodes of rhabdomyolysis. And if it is exertional, then the person has not done an unaccustomed exercise. So, they have changed the way that they do exercise and now they are exercising for two hours instead of one hour or they have introduced a new way of exercise into their exercise regimen. Then that should not be considered. It's not considered necessary to test these patients for a genetic cause. Also, the muscle enzyme typically, in genetic causes of rhabdomyolysis, goes more than fifty times above the upper limit of normal, which is more than a thousand. So that has to be taken into account. And then for the D it's Drugs and medications. This has to be ruled out before you say yes, we need to find the genetic cause of rhabdomyolysis. And then the O, it's basically family history. If you find that there is other family members who are affected or they have a high CK, then of course that would point you toward doing genetic testing. Dr Monteith: Great. So, it sounds like there's some advances there in how we approach these patients. In what way is this practice changing? You mentioned, you know, really important to rule out these potentially reversible causes first. Dr Kushlaf: Yeah. So, once you identify the theology, it becomes easier to manage the patient. So, if it is a statin-induced rhabdomyolysis, you know that you want to stop the statin and you are not going to have this problem again. So, that's quite important. The statins, of course, will have to not be reintroduced in the future for that specific patient who developed statin-induced rhabdomyolysis. But for the genetic causes of rhabdomyolysis, if you go down the path of genetic rhabdomyolysis, of course we have no cures for these disorders. We may have treatments. One of the conditions that I have alluded to as one of the case presentations in the article is a patient who has riboflavin responsive multiple acid CoA dehydrogenase deficiency, and I wanted to highlight this disorder because it's a disorder not to be missed. It does have a treatment, which is riboflavin, and that comes from the name riboflavin-responsive. So that's why I put there in the article as part of the manuscript. However, some of these disorders, once you find the genetic etiology, there may be a way of preventing it in the future generation. Family planning, reproductive medicine technologies, can help in this instance and prevent this disease from occurring in the future generations. Dr Monteith: So, why don't we move on to episodic skeletal disorders? What is your general approach for these types of diseases? Dr Kushlaf: Muscle channelopathies, skeletal muscle channelopathies, are ultra-rare disorders. And part of the issue is not giving them a high index of suspicion in the diagnostic process. So, these patients typically come to us in clinics with very vague symptoms, and they may have lived with these symptoms for a very long time. So, they may have muscle pain, they may have fatigue, they may have muscle stiffness. Even though in most instances they do not tell you that they have muscle stiffness, they will tell you that when I wake up in the morning, I feel like I walk like a robot. My legs feel rigid, something like that. The word stiffness is not usually in the vocabulary of patients. When they come to see you and you examine them and you find out that the muscle strength is normal, you may not think much about the myotonic disorder. And that's where the issue is. You always have to keep these disorders in your differential diagnosis. So, you elicit for myotonia and for paramyotonia on examination, look at the muscle size, see if there is any muscle hypertrophy that happens in fluoride channelopathies, and that will typically guide you toward the diagnosis. And also ask about whether their symptoms get worse in a cold environment. So, sometimes they tell you they don't like winter because during winter everything is not doing well. They may report that they even feel like they cannot move their face because of facial stiffness in wintertime, especially in states where it snows outside and patients will be walking outside. So, these are things, typically, that give you clues about the diagnosis. But in patients who are affected minimally with the disease, sometimes you do not catch them, really, till they come to the EMG lab because of another reason. If they develop a neck pain and someone thinks that they may have a cervical radiculopathy and they want to do an EMG on them, or if they develop carpal tunnel symptoms, they send them to the EMG lab for carpal tunnel. And the moment we see them in the EMG lab, we start doing the needle examination and we find out that there is myotonic discharges in every muscle that we stick with the needle. And we're like, well, this person must have a myotonic disorder. And you ask them more about their symptoms. They may have symptoms, but they will tell you that they have ignored them for too long because it's something that they live with throughout their lives since childhood. They thought this is what is normal for them and this is what normal people might have. They may have aches and pains here and there and that is normal. So, these are clues, typically, for the diagnosis. Once you find the myotonia, your next bet to identify the exact genetic abnormalities to do genetic testing. And nowadays I think the field has benefited from the availability of free genetic testing so we can find out which channel is affected and then move on toward freezing that disorder. Dr Monteith: So, you spoke about nondystrophic myotonia. What are some bedside tips to try and really get at the diagnosis? Dr Kushlaf: So as I said, first is, look at the muscle build of the patient. So, these disorders, chloride channelopathies---so, the autosomal dominant and autosomal recessive chloride channelopathies---can cause muscle hypertrophy. So, these patients can have an athletic appearance even though when you ask them, do you exercise? I don't exercise at all. Do you lift weights? I don't lift weights at all. And they look like bodybuilders, so that's something to think about. Also eliciting the myotonia and typically we elicit the myotonia by using, of course, the reflex hammer. You can either tap on the phenol eminence and notice the myotonia in the thumb as it moves inward and stays in that position for some time. Depending on the severity of the myotonia, you can tap on the extensor digitorum in the forearm and notice the middle finger as it gets up and gets stuck for some time before it goes down. You can also ask patients to squeeze your fingers and then release quickly. Squeeze forcefully, of course, and find out how long does it take them to release their fingers, and that way you can identify the myotonia. Also, you may need to repeat the elicitation of myotonia several times because it can be not myotonia but paramyotonia, which is the opposite of myotonia. It's basically worsening of the myotonia as you keep doing the eliciting activity. So, the more they squeeze your fingers, the more difficult it is for them to improve. While the warm up phenomenon, which is the opposite of paradoxical myotonia, is, for them, as they repeat squeezing, they are able to do it better and better. They would be able to release more quickly with each attempt. In some patients, you can also ask them to close their eyes if they have facial myotonia, to close their eyes forcefully and see how quickly does it take for them to open their eyes. You may see that they do not open their eyes quickly. Or if you repeat in patients with paramyotonia, if you ask them to close and open, close and open, close and open, there will come a point where they really cannot open their eyes anymore, and that tells you there is paramyotonia. Of course, if you find paramyotonia, then you know that this is a sodium channel abnormality, that the genetic testing would just confirm that. Dr Monteith: And what about for periodic paralysis? Is there anything new in the field? Dr Kushlaf: Periodic paralysis… if I can say one thing about periodic paralysis, it’s to talk about Andersen Tawil syndrome. It's an ultra-rare disorder also, but the episodes of paralysis that happens in patients with Andersen Tawil syndrome, they occur either with hypokalemia, so it can be hypokalemic---like, exactly hypokalemic periodic paralysis---or with hyperkalemia. So, it's hyperkalemic periodic paralysis. It doesn't really matter whether it's hyperkalemic or hypokalemic. These patients they typically have dysmorphic features. And the most common dysmorphic feature, and I chose a picture for the article, is a patient who has a small mandible. That is the most common dysmorphic feature. There are other dysmorphic features which include short stature, hypertelorism---which is the distance between eyes, the eyes become widened. Also, scoliosis and low-set ears. So, the ears are lower than the level of the eyes. So, these are dysmorphic features one can look for, but they do not exist in every patient with Andersen Tawil syndrome. The problem with Andersen Tawil syndrome is that these patients, as opposed to hyperkalemic and hypokalemic periodic paralysis, they have cardiac involvement. And the cardiac involvement can be deadly. So, it's very important that these patients are identified quickly. And anyone who has episodic weakness should have an EKG and should have halter monitoring to recognize if there are any arrhythmias or EKG abnormalities. So, one can identify anything that needs to be corrected from the cardiac standpoint. I think that is the most important point about periodic paralysis. Overall, these disorders… I mean, they are disabling and they can have huge effect on patient's life in terms of productivity and employment. And the diagnosis can be very difficult, especially that we do not know all the genes that are associated with periodic paralysis. Right now, the genetic testing that's available to us includes five genes that are associated with periodic paralysis. But I think we need to know more. There's a proportion of patients who do not have an identifiable abnormality at this time. So, I think as time goes on, we'll recognize more causes for periodic paralysis. Dr Monteith: I'm just reading your really great article, and it sounds like there's a lot of variability in presentation from I'm not feeling that well or I'm not feeling my best for mild disease, and then very severe disease where the whole body can be weak without alteration in consciousness. Dr Kushlaf: That's correct. So, my patients tell me that you never know when you're going to develop episodes of weakness. And sometimes they can recognize the precipitant, sometimes they cannot. Stress, sometimes, is a precipitant. At times, they really cannot tell what happened. And the weakness can be affecting one limb or more than one limb. It can be isolated to an arm or isolated to one leg. And that is the issue with the diagnosis, is that for those who do not suspect periodic paralysis, they are labeled as a functional neurologic disorder and they do not get the care that they need. I'm hoping that this article will shed a light on how to think about these disorders and how to diagnose them because treating them can have a significant impact on patient's life. Dr Monteith: How useful are these laboratory tests? Dr Kushlaf: So, in any patients where I suspect periodic paralysis, I would always do thyroid function testing to rule out hyperthyroidism because it can cause episodes of paralysis similar to hyperkalemic and hypokalemic paralysis. And I also do EKG and halter monitoring to make sure that I'm not missing the cardiac manifestations of Andersen Tawil syndrome. On top of that, then I would do genetic testing. And the genetic testing, as I said, at this time includes five genes. So, we will recognize any genetic abnormality that comes on that genetic testing. And if it is negative and I still have a high suspicion for the disease, I will do a long exercise test. The long exercise testing is, we record from a muscle in the hand---it's called the productive digit minimi---and stimulate the unknown nerve. We record, typically, baseline responses and then exercise the muscle for five minutes and keep recording after five minutes of exercise for up to forty minutes after. We're looking for a change in the amplitude of the motor response that typically happens over time. Dr Monteith: Great. Well, thank you so much for being on our podcast. Dr Kushlaf: I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Dr Monteith: Again, today I've been interviewing Dr Hani Kushlaf, whose article on episodic skeletal muscle disorders, muscle channelopathies, and rhabdomyolysis appears in the most recent issue of Continuum on muscle disease. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133260
info_outline
Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies With Dr. Anthony Amato
11/05/2025
Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies With Dr. Anthony Amato
Inflammatory myopathies are a large group of disorders associated with an inflammatory response targeting skeletal muscle. Treatment hinges on the use of evolving immunotherapies and diagnostic tools to quickly identify inflammatory myopathy, initiate appropriate therapy, and exclude underlying malignancy or infection of other organs. In this episode, Katie Grouse, MD, FAAN speaks with Anthony A. Amato, MD, an author of the article “Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Grouse is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a clinical assistant professor at the University of California San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Dr. Amato is the Brigham and Women’s Hospital Distinguished Chair in Neurology and the director of neuromuscular research at Mass General Brigham, and is a professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Grouse: This is Dr Katie Grouse. Today I'm interviewing Dr Anthony Amato about his article on idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, which he wrote with Dr Kian Salajegheh. This article appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Amato: Thank you. And I am Tony Amato. I'm in Boston at Mass General Brigham. Dr Grouse: It is a distinct pleasure to have you here with us today, and I'm really excited to talk with you about your article. I thought it was a fantastic overview of the subject. And I'd like to start by asking what you hope will be the key takeaway for those who are reading this article. Dr Amato: I think it's kind of basic: how to make a diagnosis, describe about the inflammatory myopathy as approach to, again, diagnosis, and then a little bit on pathogenesis, which… and kind of leading to the treatments, and hopefully we'll have more treatments based on the distinct pathogenesis in the future. Dr Grouse: Can you give a brief overview of the categories of inflammatory myopathies you reviewed in your article? Dr Amato: So, I mean, the major inflammatory myopathies, radiopathic inflammatory myopathies, are dermatomyositis, antisynthetase syndrome, immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy, inclusion body myositis, and polymyositis. Now, that's been a big change, as you know. I mean it used to be, you know, we all started off it was dermato or poly. But I've kind of made a name for myself- a bad name for myself in the early 2000s saying, I'm not sure there's much of a thing called polymyositis. I think it's a hodgepodge and it's not distinct. And that's come to be, now most of those cases are- now we find out having antisynthetase syndrome or necrotizing myositis or IBM. Dr Grouse: Could you walk us through your diagnostic approach with a patient in your clinic presenting with symptoms that are suspicious for inflammatory myopathy? Dr Amato: So, you want to really make sure that they have inflammatory myopathy as opposed to some other kind of myopathy, a muscular dystrophy, for example. Taking family history first is going to be important, clueing in are they really weak or what they're complaining of is fatigue or muscle pain? Are they feel weak but what they really are complaining of is stiffness and rigidity from parkinsonism, or they have a sensory ataxia so they can't modulate? I want to know about other organ system involvement. Do they have a rash? Do they have joint swelling and pain that you might see with arthritis? Do they have shortness of breath that you might see with interstitial lung disease or ventilatory muscle weakness? Or do they have a cardiomyopathy? What kind of weakness do they have? Is it proximal weakness in the arms or legs? Getting out of a chair, climbing stairs. Do they have problems lifting their arms over their head---so, proximal weakness---or do they have more problems with grip, finger flexion, holding a pen, tripping? Do they have swallowing problems? Do they have ocular problems? So that's the big history on the exam. Again, I'm looking for pattern of involvement. So, on my exam, is there atrophy or weakness in muscles---you know, fasciculations---which would take it out of the motor? Is it mainly proximal? Is it distal? Again, is there ocular bulbar involvement? Is it symmetric, particularly in, like, the IBM? Most of the other inflammatory myopathies are going to be mainly and proximal and mainly symmetric. IBM is different, and that the- at least in the hands it's more distal, and it's finger flexors. So, you're looking at flexing the tips of the fingers, you're looking at the forearms, best looked at in a semipronated position to see if it's atrophied. And that leads you to an IBM if you see that. So that's the main things on exam. Dr Grouse: That's a really helpful overview. I was wondering, in earlier training days, the convention was you- once you've suspected myopathy, you get your CK, you get your EMG, then that may give you the information you need for your diagnosis. It seems that things have been turned a little on their head. We're often skipping those things to go straight to the antibody testing. When should we be going for the myositis-specific antibodies before considering other things like EMG or muscle biopsy? Dr Amato: I would always get a CK first. You know, in somebody who's weak. You know, the EMG, I don't need an EMG if the CK is two or three thousand. I mean, EMG is- localize it to, is it muscle, nerve, neuromuscular junction. If it's very elevated CK, it really doesn't help me there. Sometimes if I have myotonic discharges or something that might make me think of a myotonic dystrophy or something else like that. But you can see that with the inflammatory myopathy. So, if I'm pretty sure of a myositis, I don't always do an EMG, or- unless I really need it to help guide what muscle biopsies I do. if I'm suspicious then on my exam and I see the CK---or they come to me already with the CK, which often happens, and it's very elevated---that's when I'll do the myositis-specific antibody panels if I'm really thinking that. And the important thing to know from that is, you have antibodies for dermatomyositis and antisynthetase that are on the panel that are available, and even signal recognition particle, which is a necrotizing myositis. But what's not on the panel is HMGCR antibodies, which is important because that's 70% of the necrotizing myocidites are HMGCR, and then the IBM antibody and T5-C1A is not on that. So, you need to order those separately. If somebody doesn't know, they order a myositis-specific antibody and think that it's all-inclusive, but it doesn't have IBM or the HMGCR antibody. And the other test that I sometimes will do is a skeletal-muscle MRI to help in the evaluation. Sometimes, not all the time, but I'm not sure it's a dystrophy, is it a myositis when I see a lot of STIR signal, which is edema. And you can still see STIR signal in a dystrophy and toxic. But sometimes I'll do it depending on whether I need a biopsy or not. Dr Grouse: What is the benefit of an open biopsy versus a needle biopsy, and when should we be considering using one over the other? Dr Amato: So, it really is not our decision. It's the pass lab. So, it's the technicians and the pathologists who read the biopsies need to be able to process a needle biopsy, which might be much smaller. Needle biopsies show to be fairly accurate in a lot of the hereditary disorders where you might just look for central nuclear core, and they might be- so, mainly in kids, but in the inflammatory myopathies, it's really patchy. So, if I'm thinking of an inflammatory, I like an open biopsy. I think it's hit and miss. And so, I like open biopsies for the adults that I'm thinking of inflammatory. Dr Grouse: Do you have any other tips or tricks in the diagnosis of inflammatory myopathies that you could share with our listeners? Dr Amato: I would say first, in terms of what muscle to biopsy, you're not doing them yourself, but you're referring to a surgeon. You have to tell them what to do with the biopsy. And you want to pick a muscle that's about an MRC grade 4 because if it's a normal muscle, the muscle strength, the biopsy, is likely to be normal. If it's less than a 4, you might just have end-stage muscle. And saying you can't tell end-stage muscle from a bad myositis, from a dystrophy, from a severe end-stage neurogenic. If I don't have a muscle that I would typically biopsy that's an MRC grade 4---for example, somebody with an early weakness and they’re only weak, say, in their in their hip girdle. So hip flexors, abductors, extensors, and we're usually not biopsying the iliopsoas or the gluteal muscles. Then what do you pick? That's when I like to do an EMG on one side of the body and look at proximal and distal muscles and select one that's irritable, you know, some fibs and positive sharp waves that I might biopsy. And then maybe consider doing a skeletal muscle MRI to go from muscle that's abnormal, that has a lot of edema in it, to increase the yield. Dr Grouse: That's really helpful. And then, I think, jumping from that, what are pitfalls that you've seen neurologists fall into in this diagnosis or other challenging aspects of the diagnosis that you could review with us? Dr Amato: Some of the things that we see are hard to pick up. It might be hard to pick up a rim vacuole. They're very rare, too. And so, you might miss it, particularly if you don't see a lot. Sometimes, like looking at the dermato and that's the, on the exam question, perifascicular atrophy, but that's a late stage, usually. And so, if you're really attuned and you're a good clinician, you make that diagnosis really quick. You do a biopsy, you might not see that paraphysical atrophy. So, they don't know that in a necrotizing myopathy, the pathologists often think of what they see in a toxic myopathy or a metabolic where there's a lot of necrotic fibers. But in most of the autoimmune necrotizing, it's not. It's actually what you see is more regenerating fibers, a few necrotic fibers. It's because it's usually been smoldering along for a while, and so you have many more regenerating fibers than ones that are actively, and that can fool a lot of people. So, that's a pitfall from that end of things. Some of these myositis specific antibodies aren't specific and at a low titer, particularly if you have more than one antibody being positive, that would be a red flag that it could be false. That's another pitfall. I think a lot of people don't, when they're examining people, really look at the finger flexors and stuff. And again, if I have somebody over the age of fifty, the most common muscle disease is IBM. Number two is IBM, number three is IBM. If you don't- and you have to think about that, and you need to examine the distal finger flexors because it doesn't get better with immunotherapy. You don't want to put people at the risk of immunotherapy when they're not going to get better. I talked a lot about the biopsies, and biopsy, biopsy, biopsy. But you know, sometimes you can make the diagnosis without a biopsy. So, if somebody's like a classic dermato rash and they have a dermato antibody, do they need a biopsy? No. If they have, you know, CKs of ten thousand proximal weakness, they're on a statin and they have HMGCR antibody, do they need us have a biopsy to confirm? Probably not. Dr Grouse: Those are some really great pearls that you've shared with us, and I think will be very helpful to many of our listeners. Now, you mentioned earlier about the diminishing category of polymyositis as other types of myosidites have been discovered and better described. Do you think that is the most controversial aspect of this field currently, or are there other controversial areas or areas of ongoing debate that exist? Dr Amato: It was very controversial twenty years ago, or maybe ten years ago. So, the rheumatology guidelines, they're the ones that are often saying, oh yeah, we were right. Polymyositis, it's just hodgepodge, and it's ever-shrinking. So that's not so controversial anymore. I mean, the controversies that we have, what's the pathogenesis of dermato? It's still a little debated, some- the old theory was that it was a complement-mediated microangiopathy and the damage was caused by ischemia. That's probably not the case. It looks more and more like it's a type 1 interferonopathy, and that's toxic to the vessels in the muscle. There's still a little bit of a debate about that or, you know, you have complement might be on it, but how much that might be damaging, or it's just a secondary phenomenon. I think in the antisynthetase things, I think there's some interesting things also with that these antibodies. We used to think of that they're just diagnostic biomarkers. But there's some recent studies suggesting that these antibodies which are directed against intracellular targets, which is interesting and applies to other autoimmune diseases and that are in the brain too. And we would think that, oh, if it's a intracellular target, it it's secondary. But there's suggestion now that- again, it did demonstrate that the antibodies actually get into muscle fibers. And they bind to these targets. So maybe they're just not epiphenomenon, but they might be binding to a target and causing pathology. And that's what there's some preliminary studies that are impressed, I will say, that have antibodies, anti-HMGCR, that actually go into the cell and they inhibit the enzyme. And that might be causing the pathology. And so that's interesting. And then IBM is a big field. Is this a primary autoimmune disease that has these other kinds of degenerative features like REM vacuoles, or is it a primary degenerative that has secondary inflammation, or is it a combination of both? So, that's probably the biggest controversy these days. It is probably with IBM. What the heck is causing it? Dr Grouse: Sounds like a lot that we still have to understand about these diseases. This does lead me to wonder, though, have some of these new discoveries and ideas led to or will lead to any new breakthroughs, either in diagnostics or in therapeutics? Dr Amato: So, certainly in therapeutics. So, the discovery of dermato being an interferonopathy, probably a beta-interferonopathy, has led to development of monoclonal antibodies that target interferon, and there's trials underway. And in phase 2 studies, I can tell you from talking to colleagues that participate just melted away the rash of dermato. So, I think that's going to be a very, very good drug in the future for dermato. There's others, like JAK. JAK inhibitors work on that interferon pathway too. So, I think we'll be going towards, like, less broad-spectrum steroids, IVIG, to going, let's go to the target. Certainly, in dermato, I mean, IBM, we don't know. There is an inflammatory cell that we see in IBM that has a receptor, KCRRN receptor, and there's a monoclonal antibody that targets that in IBM, and that's a phase 3 trial right now. Hopefully that study should be ending in December, and so early next year we'll have results about that. The fact that these antibodies might be pathogenic of themselves is other ways to get rid of the antibodies. So, getting rid of plasma cells and B cells, and FCRN receptors which have been approved or antagonists that are approved for myasthenia. Now CIDP might work in some of the inflammatory myopathies where we think the antibodies might be pathogenic. So, FCRN receptor antagonist and they're in trial now as well. And there's CAR-T therapies to knock out the antibody-producing lymphocytes and plasma cell. So, I think we're going to move into the field of individualized therapies as we find the distinct pathogenesis of these disorders. Dr Grouse: That's really exciting to hear and I can't wait to see what's coming down the pipeline as more of these discoveries are made and the clinical trials advance. It has been such a pleasure. I've learned so much. So much is packed into the article. So again, I can't stress enough, please take the time to check out this article. I think you'll learn a lot, and it'll really help you fine-tune your diagnostic pathway in relation to myopathies. Dr Amato: Oh, my pleasure. Thank you. Anybody has questions, please feel free to send me an email. Dr Grouse: We may just take you up on that. Again, today I've been interviewing Dr Anthony Amato about his article on idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, which he wrote with Dr Kian Salajegheh. This article appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133235
info_outline
Inclusion Body Myositis With Dr. Elie Naddaf
10/29/2025
Inclusion Body Myositis With Dr. Elie Naddaf
Inclusion body myositis (IBM), the most common myopathy in adults, is a disease of aging characterized by slowly progressive weakness. Diagnosis of IBM requires the integration of historical, clinical, and laboratory data, while management consists of a multidisciplinary approach to address comorbidities and potential complications. In this episode, Aaron Berkowitz, MD, PhD, FAAN speaks with Elie Naddaf, MD, author of the article “Inclusion Body Myositis” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Berkowitz is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a professor of neurology at the University of California San Francisco in the Department of Neurology in San Francisco, California. Dr. Naddaf is an associate professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Rochester, Minnesota. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Berkowitz: This is Dr Aaron Berkowitz, and today I'm interviewing Dr Elie Naddaf about his article on inclusion body myositis, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Welcome to the podcast, Dr Naddaf, and would you please introduce yourself to our audience? Dr Naddaf: Thank you for having me. I am Elie Naddaf, a neuromuscular neurologist at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, and one of my main focus research-wise is about inclusion body myositis. Dr Berkowitz: Fantastic. Well, this is a great article on inclusion body myositis, or IBM, as we may refer to it today. It has a lot of clinically practical tips for examining patients at the bedside and a lot of important updates for us on how to diagnose this condition. So, I encourage our listeners to check out the article, and I look forward to discussing some of the key aspects here and learning from your expertise. First, tell us about the classic presentation of IBM, when the disease is pretty easy to recognize at the bedside based on the history and exam. Dr Naddaf: Luckily, IBM is one of those diseases that has a very particular pattern of weakness that makes it easier to diagnose. However, in real life it can be very challenging for several reasons, which we will cover in this podcast and in the article. However, a typical presentation of IBM is that of an older patient, more likely to be a male---twice more likely to be a male---,presenting with slowly progressive weakness over a couple years or so. And the weakness predominantly affects the deep finger flexors in the hand. So, they most commonly present with hand grip weakness, or the quadriceps muscle presenting with some lower limb weakness. However, some patients can present with one or the other, not necessarily with both at the same time. It is usually a painless disease,, and because of the lingering course, patients tend to present within two to three years from their symptom onset. So, with that, on examination, if the patient is presenting with the hand weakness, they would demonstrate weakness in the deep finger flexors, which are the muscles that we use to flex the distal intralaryngeal joints. This weakness is often asymmetric and can be in only one hand; and also, even within the same hand, you can have a variable severity from one finger to the other. And that's one reason, although it sounds a classic phenotype, if you can imagine a patient just presenting with hand weakness, a lot of other things come to mind, whether it's a compressive neuropathy or whether it's a radiculopathy or motor neuron disease. Similarly, in the leg, the quadriceps is a big and strong muscle. So, it's often that patients’ symptoms originally or in the beginning get dismissed because the physician did not demonstrate any weakness on manual motor testing. Because it's a strong muscle, it needs to lose a certain amount of strength to be able to demonstrate that weakness by just pushing against the patient trying to extend their knee from about a 90 degree or so. That's why another way in those cases would be to examine them more functionally whether they're kneeling or squatting. It is usually a pure motor disease, although patients can commonly have a peripheral neuropathy. But typically, on exam, you mainly see muscle weakness. Dr Berkowitz: Perfect. So, if we see a patient who's an older man with progressive painless weakness of the finger flexors, quadriceps, this is sort of the classic presentation where we would consider IBM. But you mentioned in your article that some patients can present somewhat atypically when we might not immediately think of this diagnosis. What are some of the atypical presentations we should be aware of that should lead us to think about IBM as a possible etiology for the patient's pattern of weakness? Dr Naddaf: So, IBM indeed can present in any muscle group. That's why about 14% of patients may have the weakness onset beyond the finger flexors or knee extensions. And there are very particular phenotypes that stand out. Especially the most common in that scenario would be patients presenting with pure difficulty swallowing, isolated dysphasia that can sometimes precede the limb weakness by several years, and that's especially common in females. Other phenotypes including just a proximal weakness, like a limb-girdle weakness; an axial weakness, for example, head drop or camptocormia or a foot drop. And because it's an asymmetric disease, you can see the challenge there---if someone just presenting with a foot drop on one side, that it could be challenging to just think of IBM. So, those are the main phenotype. One particular phenotype that is super interesting is, patients present with severe facial weakness as if they have severe bilateral Bell's palsy. And that's the, usually, the most common first misdiagnosis. And all these patients reported so far in the literature are only females. This has not been reported in any male patients. So yes, the finger flexor quadriceps weakness is the most common typical presentation. However, IBM can present, technically, in any other muscle in the body. Dr Berkowitz: Great. Well that's very helpful information that especially comes from experts like you who see a lot of these patients and are able to make these diagnoses of these rare phenotypes. Whereas many of us general neurologists, like myself, might think of IBM only with finger flexor weakness and quadriceps weakness, perhaps with some foot drop dysphagia associated. Sounds like this is a diagnosis to consider in atypical presentations or atypical presentations of myopathy that aren't fitting other phenotypes or aren't yielding diagnostic results for other phenotypes. And you have in your article a very helpful table that goes through some of the common sites of weakness in IBM and the differential diagnosis for myopathies and other conditions to consider in patients who have the classic and less typical presenting features. So, let's say that we see a patient with clinical features suggestive of IBM. How do we go about confirming the diagnosis? What are the main diagnostic tests we would use to try to make a firm diagnosis here? Dr Naddaf: So, the gold standard so far for diagnosis for inclusion body myositis, as it is an acquired disease, has been a muscle biopsy. So, muscle biopsy is the probably most important tool in the diagnostic approach to IBM. Even in patients with a classical phenotype, that all like in any other test, it depends on your pretest probability and how sure you are the patient has IBM. But even with the classic phenotype, it is characteristic of IBM, but not pathognomic of IBM. Because if we see a high number of patients with similar phenotypes, we will run into a lot of other disorder that present similarly. And some patients---especially for instance, with myotonic dystrophies, specially type two---may be very difficult to distinguish from IBM, especially those that present in adulthood that they don't have the classic picture of a myotonic dystrophy patient you would think of. And some of them may not even have percussion myotonia. Because of that, the biopsy is very important to confirm your diagnosis in that regard. And on the biopsy, you want to see evidence of inflammation, basically, and the mesial inflammation, without going into a lot of details, to set it apart from those genetic ones. But in IBM it's not a pure inflammatory disease. There are other features on the biopsy that are very particular to IBM, two main other things we need to find. One is that of the accumulation of autophagic vacuole and protein aggregates and that of mitochondrial dysfunction. So, the other test for patients, presenting with weakness---again that depends on your clinical suspicion---would be first to establish that the underlying process is a myopathy; and hence, the EMG. And also, that's particularly important in patient with symptoms in one limb to differentiate it from compressive neuropathies or from a motor neuron disorder or other. So, the EMG tells you it's a myopathy with fibrillation potential, helps you also choose a muscle for biopsy. So as far as blood tests, the main blood test is that of the cytosolic nucleosidase 1A, or people call them IBM antibody. That's present in about half of the patients with IBM, 50%. Specificity originally reported to be high in the 90s, but in real-life practice with commercial lab it's probably lower in the 70s. There is a growing interest in the use of muscle imaging as well and IBM is one of those diseases similar to the clinical phenotype that has some distinctive pattern on imaging on MRI. But again, like the clinical phenotype, it is helpful, it is characteristic. It's not diagnostic on its own. Other blood tests in IBM include creatine kinase level. As long as you're not seeing creatine kinase in the 10,000 or 20,000, that would be very unusual in IBM and other routine blood tests that are discussed in the article. Dr Berkowitz: Right. That's a very helpful overview of the testing we would consider when we're trying to make this diagnosis that can include, as you mentioned, EMG, muscle MRI, and this five-prime cytosolic nucleosidase 1A antibody. As you said, many of these have variable sensitivity and specificity. We can diagnose a myopathy generally, or muscle inflammation more specifically, using EMG and muscle MRI respectively. It's interesting to hear that that antibody, I know there was a lot of excitement about that originally. Sounds like less sensitive and less specific than one would have hoped. In your article, you discussed sort of how to use some of these tools to try to meet the diagnostic criteria that were updated in 2024 for diagnosing IBM. And correct me if I'm wrong, this is my first time reading about these. I want to make sure I understand that essentially, you always require a biopsy for definitive diagnosis of this disease. Is that right? Dr Naddaf: That's correct. That's because of the issues that you raised with the antibody and because, even with people with the classic phenotype, you still could have other diseases that can mimic IBM that are associated with different complications, comorbidity profiles. For instance, myotonic dystrophy requires very close monitoring of cardiac rhythm, which is usually not affected in IBM. Hence, there is still the need for a biopsy, as we don't have a better test so far. The antibody has its own challenging, but I still find it very helpful in certain situations, and that's also reflected in the new criteria. It's definitely not a standalone diagnostic test. I don't think you can just draw the antibody, if it's positive, tell the patient they have IBM. To me, it's helpful in two ways, at least in my practice. One way is, it makes me think of IBM in situations where I was not considering IBM. In the end IBM is the most common disease in adulthood, so it's not a bad habit to just check the antibodies in any unusual case. Or where inconclusive case, it's just me saying, huh, that could be IBM that I missed. Then I go and try to confirm it. The other scenario that it helps me, there are a lot of cases that remain inconclusive. For instance, you just saw inflammation on biopsy, you have some pattern on MRI. You just need another piece of information to further make the case for the diagnosis. And that's where I find the antibodies helpful. And that's reflected in the new criteria. Dr Berkowitz: I see. So, if you- Yeah, so just to pick up on the antibody here, since I'm sure people be interested in when or whether to send this. You sort of use this in atypical cases where you know it's a myopathy or not. You haven't yet made a diagnosis. And you think, well, if I send this and it's positive, that's not 100% specific, but going to tip me a little more towards thinking this could be an atypical IBM case. But if it's negative, it doesn't sort of tell you either way, since you said it's only about 50% sensitive, right? Am I understanding correctly how you use the antibody? Dr Naddaf: Yes, this is correct. So basically, you don't have to check it if you think it is IBM; that also depends on your style of practice. To me, I think at some stage, with all the progress we're seeing in research in systems biology, so far there's no indication that the antibody predicts severity, and I don't think it does. But there could be at some time down the road that there are different underlying pathways or disease mechanisms that are associated with people that have the antibodies. So, it's more like for the future, it's good to know if the patient is positive or not. Dr Berkowitz: Okay. So, if biopsy is really necessary to make this diagnosis, if you see a classic presentation with an older man, as we've said before, with slowly progressive painless finger flexor weakness and quadriceps weakness, do we even need EMG or muscle MRI or this antibody or do you just go straight to biopsy in those cases when the clinical phenotype looks relatively certain? Do you still think one or more of those tests are helpful in the classic presentation? Or are those EMG, muscle MRI, and the antibody ones used more when you think, this looks sort of like IBM but it's either it's maybe early and it's not sort of fully kind of developed into the classic phenotype or it's very asymmetric, which you can see in IBM, or whether it's sort of has more atypical features or only one of the classic features? How do you use EMG muscle MRI in the antibodies when you know you're going to need biopsy ultimately, if this is the diagnosis you have in mind? Dr Naddaf: That's a great question. And all of the above would be correct depending on the setting you practice in. If I were practicing in a community where I have the privilege to do things step by step, I might approach it a little bit differently. Being at the referral center with many patients coming with a one-stop shop and they need to do everything possible rather than returning, that's also another different practice scenario. But in general, you want the EMG if you're not sure it's a myopathy, especially that these patients are asymmetric and sometimes the findings are in a single limb. So, you would want the EMG when you're not sure it's a myopathy, or also you need a little bit more information on what muscle to biopsy, you could use the EMG. If those questions have already been answered, you don't have to do the EMG. Now regarding the biopsy, if it is the classic phenotype and you think it's going to be a bingo with the biopsy, you might not need to do any antibody or MRI or any further testing. Now with one caveat that the biopsy might not give you the full picture or all the features, then you could go back and do the rest. And that's actually all integrated in the new criteria. So, in the new 2024 revised European Neuromuscular Center diagnostic criteria for IBM, the main differences are the following: now you can use additional test measures to support the diagnosis in addition to the biopsy. So that will probably reduce the need to have a repeated muscle biopsy. Two, you could have an atypical form and still have the diagnosis. You don't have to wait until your finger flexor or knee extensors are involved. And that's very important also, because criteria generally are made for clinical trials where you want to know for sure who you are treating. But at the same time, you don't want to wait till advanced stages of the disease where treatments might not work. Diagnostic criteria are not made to be used in clinical practice, but at the same time they offer a good framework, a good suggestion for people to use in their clinical practice. And just always remember to tailor it to your particular patients that you're seeing. In those criteria, basically, we go by scenario depending on your level of suspicion. There is no possible probable. You either make the diagnosis or you don't make it. And as you said, if you have a classic phenotype patient with deep finger flexor weakness in the upper limb and knee extends her weakness in the lower limb, your pretest probability is very high, and the chances that you're wrong are low. They're not zero, they're low. That's why I was just showing in the mesial inflammation on the biopsy, which would rule out your genetic mimicor. You're pretty confident of the diagnosis. And the other scenarios, then let's say you have only one limb, then you need a little bit more support. And you have an atypical form where the differential is very wide. You want to provide more supportive criteria, and the supportive criteria could be other features in the biopsy, whether it's the CCO negative fibers or derma vacuoles, or you could use MRI and antibodies if they're available to you. In many countries, these are still not available, but if they're available, that's good. You could use them as supportive criteria. That was the logic behind those revised criteria that are discussed by scenario in detail in the article. Dr Berkowitz: Fantastic. That's very helpful. Yeah, as you mentioned this- the criteria reviewed in the article, you have a very helpful figure there with all the branch points of how to get to the diagnosis, but very helpful to hear how you think about combining these tests in practice in different scenarios to get to the final diagnosis. So, IBM is considered an inflammatory myopathy, right? Like dermatomyositis and antisynthetase syndrome and immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy. And yet it gets its own separate article each time we do a Continuum issue on muscle disorders, right? Because it's unique in that it doesn't respond to any immune- immunomodulatory or immunosuppressive therapy like these other inflammatory myopathies. So why do you think, or why is it thought by experts in the field like yourself, that this is an inflammatory myopathy but it, at least from a treatment perspective, appears to behave so differently from the other inflammatory myopathies and doesn't respond to immunomodulatory therapy---or at least we haven't found the right key in the right block of immunomodulatory therapy to treat this disease? Dr Naddaf: That's a great question, and it's an area that I'm particularly interested in from a research standpoint. So, all these entities were classified as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies because they had inflammation on muscle biopsy. And IBM does have inflammation on muscle biopsy. Even when we study gene...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133195
info_outline
Limb-Girdle Muscular Dystrophies With Dr. Teerin Liewluck
10/22/2025
Limb-Girdle Muscular Dystrophies With Dr. Teerin Liewluck
Limb-girdle muscular dystrophies (LGMDs) encompass a group of genetically heterogeneous skeletal muscle disorders. There has been an explosion of newly identified LGMD subtypes in the past decade, and results from preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials of genetic therapies are promising for future disease-specific treatments. In this episode, Gordon Smith, MD, FAAN, speaks with Teerin Liewluck, MD, FAAN, FANA, author of the article “Limb-Girdle Muscular Dystrophies” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Smith is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a professor and chair of neurology at Kenneth and Dianne Wright Distinguished Chair in Clinical and Translational Research at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia. Dr. Liewluck is a professor of neurology at the Division of Neuromuscular Medicine and Muscle Pathology Laboratory at Mayo Clinic College of Medicine in Rochester, Minnesota. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Smith: This is Dr Gordon Smith with Continuum Audio. Today I'm interviewing Dr Teerin Liewluck, a good friend of mine at the Mayo Clinic, about his article on the limb girdle muscular dystrophies. This article appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders, a topic that is near and dear to my heart. Teerin, welcome to the podcast, and maybe you can introduce yourself to our listeners. Dr Liewluck: Thank you very much, Gordon, and I want to say hi to all the Continuum fans. So, I'm Dr Teerin Liewluck, I'm the professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. So, my practice focus on all aspects of muscle diseases, both acquired and genetic myopathies. Glad to be here. Dr Smith: I just had the great pleasure of seeing you at a seminar in Houston where you talked about this topic. And so, I'm really primed for this conversation, which I'm very excited about. I find this topic a little hard, and I'm hoping I can learn more from you. And I wonder if, as we get started, recognizing many of our listeners are not in practices focused purely on muscle disease, maybe you can provide some context about why this is important for folks doing general neurology or even general neuromuscular medicine? Why do they need to know about this? Dr Liewluck: Yes, certainly. So, I would say limb girdle muscular dystrophy probably the most complex category of subgroup of muscle diseases because, by itself, it includes thirty-four different subtypes, and the number’s still expanding. So, each subtype is very rare. But if you group together, it really have significant number of patients, and these patients present with proximal weakness, very high CK, and these are common patients that can show up in the neurology clinic. So, I think it's very important even for general neurologists to pick up what subtle clues that may lead to the diagnosis because if we are able to provide correct diagnosis for the patients, that's very important for patient management. Dr Smith: So, I wonder if maybe we can talk a little bit about the phenotype, Terran. I mean, your article does a great job of going over the great diversity. And you know, I think many of us here, you know, limb girdle muscular dystrophy and we think of limb girdle weakness, but the phenotypic spectrum is bananas, right? Rhabdomyolysis, limb girdle distal myopathy. I mean, when should our listeners suspect LGMD? Dr Liewluck: Yes, I think by the definition to all the LGMD patients will have limb girdle of proximal weakness and very high CK. So, these are common phenotypes among thirty-four different subtypes. But if it did take into details, they have some subtle differences. In the article, what I try to simplify all these different subtypes that we can categorize at least half of them into three main group that each group the underlying defect sharing among those subtypes and also translate into similar muscles and extra muscular manifestations. You will learn that some of the limb girdle muscular dystrophy may present with rhabdomyolysis. And we typically think of this as metabolic myopathies. But if you have a rhabdomyolysis patient, the CK remain elevated even after the acute episode, that’s the key that we need to think this could be LGMD. That's for an example. Dr Smith: So, I wonder if maybe we can start there. I was going to go in a different direction, but this is a good transition. It's easy to see the opportunity to get confused between LGMD or, in that case, a metabolic myopathy or other acquired myopathies. And I think particularly adult neurologists are more accustomed to seeing acquired muscle disease. Are there particular clues that, or pearls that adult neurologists seeing patients with muscle disease can use to recognize when they should be thinking about LGMD given the diverse phenotype? Dr Liewluck: Yes. What I always tell the patient is that there are more than a hundred different types of muscle diseases, but we can easily divide into groups: acquired and genetic or hereditary. So, the acquired disease is when you encounter the patients who present with acute or subacute cause of the weakness, relatively rapidly progressive. But on the opposite, if you encounter the patient who present with a much more slowly progressive cause of weakness over several months or years, you may need to think about genetic disease of the muscle with also including limb-girdle muscular dystrophy. The detailed exam to be able to distinguish between each type of muscular dystrophy. For example, if proximal weakness, certainly limb girdle muscular dystrophy. If a patient has facial weakness, scapular winking, so you would think about facial scapular hematoma dystrophy. So, the slowly progressive cause of weakness, proximal pattern of weakness, CK elevation, should be the point when you think about LGMD. Dr Smith: So, I have a question about diagnostic evaluation. I had a meeting with one of my colleagues, Qihua Fan, who's a great peripheral nerve expert, who also does neuromuscular pathology. And we were talking about how the pathology field has changed so much over the last ten years, and we're doing obviously fewer muscle biopsies. Our way of diagnosing them has changed a lot with the evolution of genetic testing. What's your diagnostic approach? Do you go right to genetic testing? Do you do targeted testing based on phenotype? What words of wisdom do you have there? Dr Liewluck: Yes, so, I mean, being a muscle pathologist myself, it is fair to say that the utility of muscle biopsies when you encounter a patient with suspects that limb girdle muscular dystrophy have reduced over the year. For example, we used to have like fifteen, seventeen hundred muscle biopsies a year; now we do only thirteen hundred biopsies a year. Yes, as you pointed out, the first step in my practice if I suspect LGMD is to go with genetic testing. And I would prefer the last gene panel that not only include the LGMD, but also include all other genetic muscle disease as well as the conjunctive myopic syndrome, because the phenotype can be somehow difficult to distinguish in certain patients. Dr Smith: So, do you ever get a muscle biopsy, Teerin? I mean you obviously do; only thirteen hundred. Holy cow, that's a lot. So, let me reframe my question. When do you get a muscle biopsy in these patients? Dr Liewluck: Muscle biopsy still is present in LGMD patients, it’s just we don't use it at the first-tier diagnostic test anymore. So, we typically do it in selected cases after the genetic testing in those that came back inconclusive. As you know, you may run into the variant of unknown significance. You may use the muscle biopsy to see, is there any histopathology or abnormal protein Western blot that may further support the heterogenicity of the VUS. So, we still do it, but it typically comes after genetic testing and only in the selected cases that have inconclusive results or negative genetic testing. Dr Smith: I'd like to ask a question regarding serologic testing for autoantibodies. I refer to a really great case in your article. There are several of them, but this is a patient, a FKRP patient, who was originally thought to have dermatomyositis based on a low-titer ME2 antibody. You guys figured out the correct diagnosis. We send a lot of antibody panels out. Wonder if you have any wisdom, pearls, pitfalls, for how to interpret antibody tests in patients with chronic myopathies? We send a lot of them. And that's the sort of population where we need to be thinking about limb-girdle muscular dystrophies. It's a great case for those, which I hope is everyone who read your article in detail. What do you have to say about that? Dr Liewluck: Yes, so myositis antibodies, we already revolutionized a few of muscle diseases. I recall when I finished my fellowship thirteen years ago, so we don't really have much muscle myositis antibodies to check. But now the panel is expanded. But again, the antibodies alone cannot lead to diagnosis. You need to go back to your clinical. You need to make sure the clinical antibodies findings are matched. For example, if the key that- if the myocytes specific antibodies present only at the low positive title, it’s more often to be false positive. So, you need to look carefully back in the patient, the group of phenotypes, and when in doubt we need to do muscle biopsies. Now on the opposite end, the other group of the antibody is the one for necrotizing autoimmune myopathy; or, the other name, immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy. This is the new group that we have learned only just recently that some patients may present as a typical presentation. I mean, when even thinking about the whole testing autoimmune myopathy, we think about those that present with some acute rapidly progressive weakness, maybe has history of sudden exposures. But we have some patients that present with very slowly progressive weakness like muscular dystrophies. So now in my practice, if I encounter a patient I suspect LGMD, in addition to doing genetic testing for LGMD, I also test for necrotizing doing with myopathy antibodies at the same time. And we typically get antibody back within what, a week or two, but projected testing would take a few months. Dr Smith: Yeah. And I guess maybe you could talk a little bit about pitfalls and interpretation of genetic tests, right? I think you have another case in your article, and I've certainly seen this, where a patient is misdiagnosed as having a genetic myopathy, LGMD, based on, let's say, just a misinterpretation of the genetic testing, right? So, I think we need to think of it on both sides. And I like the fact that the clinical aspects of diagnosis really are first and foremost most important. But maybe you can talk about wisdom in terms of interpretation of the genetic panel? Dr Liewluck:Yes. So genetic testing, I think, is a complex issue, particularly for interpretation. And if you're not familiar with this, it’s probably best to have your colleagues in genetics that help looking at this together. So, I think the common scenario we encounter is that in those dystrophies that are autosomal recessive, so we expect that the patient needs to have two abnormal copies of the genes to cause the disease. And if patients have only one abnormal copy, they are just a carrier. And commonly we see patients refer to us as much as dystrophy is by having only one abnormal copy. If they are a carrier, they should not have the weakness from that gene abnormality. So, this would be the principle that we really need to adhere. And if you run into those cases, then maybe you need to broaden your differential diagnosis. Dr Smith: I want to go back to the clinical phenomenology, and I've got a admission to make to you, Teerin. And I find it really hard to keep track of these disorders at, you know, thirty-four and climbing a lot of overlap, and it's hard to remember them. And I'm glad that I'm now going to have a Continuum article I can go to and look at the really great tables to sort things out. I'm curious whether you have all these top of mind? Do you have to look at the table too? And how should people who are seeing these patients organize their thoughts about it? I mean, is it important that you memorize all thirty-four plus disorders? How can you group them? What's your overall approach to that? Dr Liewluck: I need to admit that I've not memorize all twenty-four different subtypes, but I think what I triy to do even in my real-life practice is group it all together if you can. For example, I think that the biggest group of these LGMD is what we call alpha-dystroglycanopathies. So, this include already ten different subtypes of recessive LGMD. So alpha-dystroglycan is the core of the dystrophin-associated glycoprotein complex. And it’s heavy glycosylated protein. So, the effect in ten different genes can affect the glycosylation or the process of adding sugar chain to this alpha-dystroglycan. And they have similar features in terms of the phenotype. They present with proximal weakness, calf pseudohypertrophy, very high CK, some may have recurrent rhabdomyolysis, and cardiac and rhythmic involvement are very common. This is one major group. Now the second group is the limb-girdle muscular dystrophy due to defective membrane repair, which includes two subtypes is the different and on dopamine five. The common feature in this group is that the weakness can be asymmetric and despite proximal weakness, they can have calf atrophy. On muscle biopsy sometimes you can see a myeloid on the muscle tissues. And the third group is the sarcoglycanopathy, which includes four different subtypes, and the presentation can look like we share. For the rest, sometimes go back to the table. Dr Smith: Thank you for that. And it prompts another question that I always wonder about. Do you have any theories about why such variability in the muscle groups that are involved? I mean, you just brought up dystroglycanopathy, for instance, as something that can cause a very distal predominant myopathy; others do not. Do we at this point now have an understanding given the better genetics that we have on this and work going on in therapeutic development, which I want to get to in a minute, that provides any insight why certain muscle groups are more affected? Dr Liewluck: Very good question, Gordon. And I would say the first question that led me interested in muscle disease---and this happened probably back in 2000 when I just finished medical school---is why, why, why? Why does muscle disease tend to affect proximal muscles? I thought by now, twenty-five years later, we’d have the answer. I don't. I think this, you don't know clearly why muscle diseases, some affect proximal, some affect distal. But the hypothesis is, and probably my personal hypothesis is, that maybe certain proteins may express more in certain muscles and that may affect different phenotypes. But, I mean, dysferlin has very good examples that can confuse us because some patients present with distal weakness, some patients present with proximal weakness, that's by the same gene defect. And in this patient, when we look at the MRI in detail, actually the patterns of fatty replacements in muscle are the same. Even patient who present clinically as a proximal or distal weakness, the imaging studies show the same finding. Bottom line, we don't know. Dr Smith: Yeah, who knew it could be so complex? Teerin, you brought up a really great point that I wanted to ask about, which is muscle MRI scan, right? We're now seeing studies that are doing very broad MR imaging. Do you use some muscle MRI very frequently in your clinical evaluation of these patients? And if so, how? Dr Liewluck: Maybe I don't use it as much as I could, but the most common scenario I use in this setting is when I have the genetic testing come back with the VUS. So, we look at each VUS, each gene in detail. And if anything is suspicious, what I do typically go back to the literature to see if that gene defect in particular has any common pattern of muscle involvement on the MRI. And if there is, I use MRI as one of the two to try to see if I can escalate the pathogenicity of that VUS. Dr Smith: And a VUS is a “Variant of Unknown Significance,” for our listeners. I'm proud that I remember that as a geneticist. These are exciting times in neurology in general, but particularly in an inherited muscle disease. And we're seeing a lot of therapeutic development, a lot going on in Duchenne now. What's the latest in terms of disease-modifying therapeutics and gene therapies in LGMD? Dr Liewluck: Yes. So, there are several precritical and early-phase critical trials for gene therapy for the common lymphoma of muscular dystrophies. For example, the sarcoglycanopathies, and they also have some biochemical therapy that arepossible for the LGMD to FKRP. But there are many things that I expect probably will come into the picture broader or later phase of critical tryouts, and hopefully we have something to offer for the patients similar to patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Dr Smith: What haven't we talked about, I mean, holy cow? There's so much in your article. What's one thing we haven't talked about that our listeners need to hear? Dr Liewluck: Good questions. So, I think we covered all, but often we get patients with proximal weakness and high CK, and they all got labeled as having limb-girdlemuscular dystrophy. What I want to stress is that proximal weakness and high CK is a common feature for muscle diseases, so they need to think broad, need to think about all possibilities. Particularly don't want to miss something treatable. Chronic, slowly progressive cause, as I mentioned earlier, we think more about muscle dystrophy, but at the cranial range, we know that rare patients with necrotic autonomyopathy and present with limb good of weakness at a slowly progressive cost. So, make sure you think about these two when suspecting that LGMD patient diabetic testing has come back inconclusive. Dr Smith: Well, that's very helpful. And fortunately, there's several other articles in this issue of Continuum that help people think through this issue more broadly. Teerin, you certainly don't disappoint. I enjoyed listening to you about a month ago, and I enjoyed reading your article a great deal and enjoy talking to you even more. Thank you very much. Dr Liewluck: Thank you very much, Gordon. Dr Smith: Again, today I've been interviewing Dr Teerin Liewluck about his article on limb-girdle muscular dystrophy, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Please be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes for this and other issues. And thanks to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133140
info_outline
Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy With Dr. Renatta Knox
10/15/2025
Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy With Dr. Renatta Knox
Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) is one of the most common forms of muscular dystrophy, affecting individuals across the lifespan with variable severity. Advances in genetic understanding and therapeutic development have led to an era of promising disease-modifying strategies. In this episode, Katie Grouse, MD FAAN, speaks with Renatta N. Knox, MD, PhD, author of the article “Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Grouse is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a clinical assistant professor at the University of California San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Dr. Knox is an assistant professor of neurology in the Division of Pediatric Neurology and Neuromuscular Section at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Grouse: This is Dr Katie Grouse. Today I'm interviewing Dr Renatta Knox about her article on fascioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Knox: Hi Katie, thank you so much for the invitation for the audio interview. I'm looking forward to our conversation. As she mentioned, my name is Renata Knox. It's a pleasure to be here today. Dr Grouse: I'd like to start by asking, what is the key message that you hope your readers will take from your article? Dr Knox: I would say two things. The first is an appreciation and understanding of the unique genetic mechanism that leads to FSHD. And the second is the really exciting therapy landscape that we find ourselves in. So, we're hopeful that there will actually be disease-modifying therapies for FSHD soon. Dr Grouse: We're really looking forward to learning more about that. Now, before we get to that piece, could you just remind us of the clinical manifestations and features that are specific to FSHD? Dr Knox: So, one of the most unique things about FSHD that we see clinically is the pattern of weakness. So, one of the first features is that it's asymmetric. And then there are certain muscle groups that typically are affected, and that's partly where the name comes from. So, we see effects in the face, the limbs, the trunk; and so, those are some of the unique features that we see clinically. Dr Grouse: I'd love it if you could walk us through how you approach diagnosing a patient who presents with proximal weakness where FSHD is in your differential. Dr Knox: Yeah, it's a really great question. So, I would say it depends. So, I actually focus on FSHD in my clinical practice. So, many times patients are referred to me because there's a very high suspicion or there's a known family history of FSHD. So, that's one category of cases. I would say the other category of case is where it's, as you said, maybe more proximal weakness more broadly. Someone that’s before me who has a known family history, they really have some of the characteristic physical features---which I'm pretty attuned to, as this is, you know, part of my subspecialty---I'll actually go directly to FSHD genetic testing. And that is one of the unique features of this disease, that the next-generation sequencing panels that are typically used for some of our other muscle diseases, FSHD is not captured on those. So, we actually have to send targeted testing for FSHD to diagnose it. So, that is one category where, again, I have a very high suspicion either based on their clinical presentation and/or a known family history, then I will actually go directly to FSHD-targeted genetic testing. In the second case, where it is one of the conditions that I'm considering among others, I will do more broad testing. So, I will get a CK level to see if there's evidence of muscle breakdown. I'll likely also do one of the next-generation sequencing panels that we have access to, which will allow us to identify, potentially, one to two hundred potential muscle diseases. And then again, if FSHD is higher on my differential in that second group of patients, then I will also send targeted FSHD-specific testing. Dr Grouse: That's really helpful. And I'm wondering if you have any thoughts about common pitfalls that you've seen when providers are trying to work this up? Dr Knox: I don't know if I would say pitfalls. I think I would acknowledge that it's challenging. My subspecialty training in neuromuscular medicine and also gene therapy. And so FSHD is pretty high on my radar. But I would say in neurology in general---and then, you know, the general medical population---,it really isn't something that many people are seeing. So, I would say what patients will communicate to us sometimes is some frustration that maybe it took time to make the diagnosis, but I just have a deep understanding that it's not something that is on many people's radars. And I think, again, it's tricky because it's not picked up on these next-generation sequencing panels, which many of us can send pretty easily. It will be missed. And I will say the biggest pitfall is, again, if you're not thinking about it and you don't send that testing, you actually- it's very difficult to diagnose it. Dr Grouse: Thank you so much for highlighting that. I think there are many people who are not aware that those different panels really aren't picking that up and that they have to test specifically. So, I think that's a great thing for all of us to keep in mind. Are there any tips or tricks to the diagnosis, other than the genetic issues that you mentioned, that sometimes can really bring this diagnosis to the forefront? Dr Knox: I think things that really tip me off to having a higher suspicion for FSHD is facial weakness that we can detect on our exam. Scapular winging---again, there's a small subset of disorders which can impact that. Someone who's presenting with foot drop, you know, with facial weakness, I think definitely about FSHD more. Also, clinically, kind of the presentation or things that they're beginning to have difficulty with is a tip-off. So, if someone is an athlete, like, they're a volleyball player or basketball player and they say, oh, I'm having difficulties, you know, with movements that require them to elevate their arm, which can be a sign of the shoulder weakness that we classically see. Or someone who says, oh, I'm having a harder time shampooing my hair or combing my hair. So those can be tip-offs again, which are basically referencing the type of weakness that they have. Another feature of FSHD which isn't necessarily as broadly appreciated is that pain and fatigue are very common. So, if someone is coming in and saying, actually, I also have a significant amount of fatigue as well or a lot of pain, that's something that can tip me off to it. Hearing loss is something that we can also see in up to 20% of patients with FSHD. So, if they are having those symptoms or saying they're ringing in their ears, these are some things that will make me begin to think about it more. Dr Grouse: Oh, really helpful. I also found it really fascinating reading some of the very FSHD-specific clinical signs, some interesting- some diagrams and pictures as well, that are very specific to the pattern of weakness that develops in FSHD. So, I encourage our listeners to check that out. But are there any highlights from those little clinical pearls that you'd like to point out? Dr Knox: I think the poly-hill sign---so, these are these literal hills that we can see in the shoulders of patients with FSHD---is pretty classic. Popeye arms, which is this older term that we still use that has to do with which muscle groups are preserved versus those that have atrophy. So that's a common feature. And then I would say, really, the asymmetry is something that is a unique feature in FSHD. And again, we did our best to provide good representative images. So again, as you mentioned, Katie, I would really encourage people to look at those images and then think about cases that they may have seen and how similar they are so they can begin to recognize those signs as well. Dr Grouse: Now going back to the genetic topic, the complex genetic underpinnings of FSHD are really well-explained in your article; and again, worth taking a look at to remind ourselves of everything that's of that pathology. Now, I was wondering though, if you could give us a brief overview of how we should approach genetic testing in a suspected case of FSHD? You mentioned some specific panels, but it does sound like there's some more complexity to it as well. Dr Knox: Yes, and I'll just kind of briefly explain that complexity. Part of the thing that we're detecting in the genetic testing is the repeat number. And so, we're actually looking for a contraction in a repeat number. So, not an expansion, which were typical for some of the diseases that we think about, the trinucleotide repeat disorders. And this is why it’s not captured in the next-generation sequencing panels, because they do not currently have the ability to do that. And so, again, what the type of testing that I do really depends on my suspicion. So again, if my suspicion is very high for FSHD---they have a family history, they have the classic features---then I will actually go directly to an FSHD-specific testing, which is available from various sources. If, again, it's among different things that I'm thinking about, I will get a CK lab. I typically will also send a next-generation sequencing panel specific for muscle diseases, perhaps muscular dystrophy; again, depending on what I'm thinking about. And then I will also send in a specific FSHD genetic test as well. People are beginning to use whole-genome sequencing, which is capturing some of our true nucleotide repeat disorders and becoming more comprehensive. So, my hope is that as that becomes more standard of care---like, whole-exome sequencing can be gotten pretty routinely now---that it may be easier for us to make some of these diagnoses. Dr Grouse: Well, that's really helpful, and thanks for that overview. Now another thing that you mentioned that I thought was really interesting in your article was that patients with, you know, history of FSHD, perhaps in the family, who are pregnant and want to screen for this disease would not be able to use sort of the more common screening tests like cell-free DNA testing and may have to go to other means to do that. What is generally their route to this type of testing? Dr Knox: Yeah, great question, and really important question for family planning purposes, and it definitely comes up in clinical practice. And so again, because of the unique genetics of FSHD, you actually have to do invasive genetic testing currently to be able to test it. And so that's, you know, amnio or chorio, and then send it to a lab that can perform, again, FSHD-specific testing on the samples that are presented. And there are obviously labs that are capable of doing that and centers that are capable of doing that, but it is not picked up on the cell-free DNA panels that are being very routinely used. You or your provider has to be thinking about it to send that specific testing, similar to our patients that come into clinic and have not yet been diagnosed. Dr Grouse: Once you have the diagnosis, what are our options for therapy? I think it sounds like at this current time, it looks to be mostly supportive. What are some of the supportive care options we should keep in mind? Dr Knox: Yes, so that is definitely accurate. Care today is supportive, but again, we're very excited about the clinical trial and therapy landscape for FSHD. So, I work very closely with my physical therapy colleagues that are in clinic with me. So, we work very closely with physical and occupational therapists to help with supportive measures, adaptive measures, doing assessments, helping our patients to be able to move and exercise safely and effectively. As I mentioned, pain is very common in FSHD and so we can treat that with medications. The most common medication that we use to treat for pain in FSHD are NSAIDs. And then other than that it's really, you know, supportive measures. Do they need to see other subspecialists? There are some surgical options. Those are used very rarely to help with some of the scapular weakness, but typically it's physical therapy, occupational therapy, supportive devices. We treat the pain as we're able to, and then we work with other subspecialists to screen, monitor and support our patients to the best of our ability. Dr Grouse: Well, without further ado, I'd love to hear more about what's coming down the pipeline in clinical trials. What can we look forward to seeing, hopefully, in future years to treat these patients? Dr Knox: Yes. And so, this is actually what got me interested in the neuromuscle space in general is that, because we now for many years have known the genetic cause of many of these disorders as well as some of the underlying mechanisms, we can actually use advances in therapeutics to do what we call targeted therapies. So, rather than treating symptoms or indirect methods or doing kind of broad drug screens---which, again, still do take place and still do have their place---we actually can target mechanisms directly. And so, we know that the underlying biology of FSHD is due to this protein called DUX4 being expressed when it should not be. So, it's what we call a toxic gain of function. And so, the targeted way to address this is to suppress DUX4 expression. And so, kind of broadly speaking, what we're really excited about are a couple of products that are currently in clinical trials right now that actually caused DUX4 suppression to be suppressed. And again, these are targeted pathways. And so, again, the hope is that by doing that, we can hopefully slow the progression of the disease, potentially stop progression of the disease, and potentially reverse. Again, we don't know if that might be possible, but that is one of the hopes. Dr Grouse: Well, that's really exciting, and I know we're all looking forward to more coming down the pipeline soon, and hopefully more things that can really offer some exciting treatments for our patients with this condition. Now, a little more deep-dive into our patients who are diagnosed. You've reviewed some of the treatments currently available and hopefully may someday soon be available. Are there other things that we should be keeping in mind in this population? For instance, screenings that we should be doing for other extramuscular manifestations that we need to be thinking about? Dr Knox: I will answer that question two ways. I think something that's very important to acknowledge is the impact that these diagnoses and these conditions have on our patient practically, psychologically. One of the other unique features of FSHD is, it's autosomal-dominant. So, if it is in a family, you can have many family members who are affected, but the variability is very high. And so, you can have in the same family someone who is wheelchair-dependent, and someone else in the family with the same underlying genetics who has no signs or symptoms or is very mildly affected. And that is something that is definitely challenging for our families and patients to navigate if they're very different than their family members with the same condition. And just navigating the world with a condition that, you know, can be physically debilitating and cause changes to what they're able to do or not able to do, progression is something that's very difficult to handle. So, I think that's one set of things. And we try our best, you know, with my team and my other colleagues in the space, to support our families and patients in the best way that we can. Secondly, there is very important screening that needs to be done for this condition. So, one of the things- and the current guidelines which are actually being updated, the last update was in 2015 is all patients that undergo pulmonary function testing or PFTs. And so that's something we do at baseline and we do at least annually in my practice. Young kids who are presenting very early or patients with certain genetics that we know are more predisposed to extra muscular manifestations, we recommend screening for hearing, which is one of the manifestations, and ophthalmologic exam to look for retinovascular changes, which is one of the manifestations as well. Those are the more common ones that are typically done. There's also some evidence in pediatric patients with very severe manifestations that there may be some cognitive impacts, learning impacts. And so, that is something we're also thinking about screening and supporting our patients in that way. And again, we typically work with these patients in a multidisciplinary team depending on what manifestations and the degrees to which they're impacted by the disorder. Dr Grouse: Thank you so much for that answer. I think a lot of us forget sometimes when we get really focused on what can we do now, that we forget to kind of stop and reflect on sort of the more holistic approach. How is this affecting the patient? How is this affecting the patient's family dynamic, and what other ways are they going through life with this condition that we need to be thinking about? So, I appreciate you bringing that up. I wanted to ask, sort of based on what you're talking about and what you mentioned already, you happened to mention that what initially drew you that to this work was your interest in some of the really exciting breakthroughs in the field. Well, was there anything else that drew you to, specifically, congenital neuromuscular diseases, and FSHD in particular? Dr Knox: I'm a physician scientist by training, and so I would describe myself also as a molecular biologist. So, I love getting into the nitty gritties of disease mechanisms, what genes are doing in bodies, how they function. And so, as I mentioned earlier, in the neuromuscle space, we've known for many years the genetic cause of many of these disorders and have done great, you know, mechanistic work to kind of define why we see the disease. And then now we're at this intersection of that knowledge marrying with these really novel therapeutic approaches, gene therapy approaches, being able to intersect and then in very creative ways actually target diseases very directly. And so, I would say it really is the combination of those two things. FSHD has a really fascinating unique biology, which again, we encourage everyone to read about more in the article. That really drew me to it. I'm very interested in gene regulation, transcription. This is one of the underlying mechanisms that is gone awry in the disorder, and then that being married to advances in therapeutics. So, you could wed those two pieces of information and actually meaningfully impact patient 's lives. And again, that's the real privilege and honor to witness is how these therapies can transform lives. And I saw it happened with this one case for this one disorder when I was a resident where there was no treatment. Young children, unfortunately, would not survive the disease. And then I saw the therapy come be in development and literally change the trajectory. And this is what we're very hopeful for in the FSHD space, that wedding, this...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38133060
info_outline
A Pattern Recognition Approach to Myopathy With Dr. Margherita Milone
10/08/2025
A Pattern Recognition Approach to Myopathy With Dr. Margherita Milone
While genetic testing has replaced muscle biopsy in the diagnosis of many genetic myopathies, clinical assessment and the integration of clinical and laboratory findings remain key elements for the diagnosis and treatment of muscle diseases. In this episode, Casey Albin, MD, speaks with Margherita Milone, MD, PhD, FAAN, FANA, author of the article “A Pattern Recognition Approach to Myopathy” in the Continuum® October 2025 Muscle and Neuromuscular Junction Disorders issue. Dr. Albin is a Continuum® Audio interviewer, associate editor of media engagement, and an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Milone is a professor of neurology and the director of the Muscle Pathology Laboratory at Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science in Rochester, Minnesota. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Albin: Hello, this is Dr Casey Albin. Today I'm interviewing Dr Margherita Milone on her article on a pattern recognition approach to myopathy, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Welcome to the podcast, Dr Milone. Thank you so much for joining us. I'll start off by having you introduce yourself to our listeners. Dr Milone: Hello Casey, thank you so much for this interview and for bringing the attention to the article on muscle diseases. So, I'm Margherita Milone. I'm one of the neuromuscular neurologists at Mayo Clinic in Rochester. I have been interested in muscle disorders since I was a neurology resident many years ago. Muscle diseases are the focus of my clinical practice and research interest. Dr Albin: Wonderful. Thank you so much. When I think about myopathies, I generally tend to think of three large buckets: the genetic myopathy, the inflammatory myopathies, and then the necrotizing myopathies. Is that a reasonable approach to conceptualizing these myopathies? Dr Milone: Yeah, the ideology of the myopathies can be quite broad. And yes, we have a large group of genetic muscle diseases, which are the most common. And then we have immune-mediated muscle diseases, which include inflammatory myopathies as well as some form of necrotizing myopathies. Then we have some metabolic myopathies, which could be acquired or could be genetic. And then there are muscle diseases that are due to toxins as well as to infection. Dr Albin: Wow. So, lots of different etiologies. And that really struck me about your article, is that these can present in really heterogeneous ways, and some of them don't really read the rule book. So, we have to have a really high level of suspicion, for someone who's coming in with weakness, to remember to think about a myopathy. One of the things that I like to do is try to take us through a little bit of a case to sort of walk us through how you would approach if someone comes in. So, let's say you get, you know, a forty-year-old woman, and she's presenting with several months of progressive weakness. And she says that even recently she's noted just a little bit of difficulty swallowing. It feels to her like things are getting stuck. What are some of the things when you are approaching the history that would help you tease this to a myopathy instead of so many other things that can cause a patient to be weak? Dr Milone: Yes. So, as you mentioned, people who have a muscle disease have the muscle weakness often, but the muscle weakness is not just specific for a muscle disease. Because you can have a mass weakness in somebody who has a neurogenic paralysis. The problem with diagnosis of muscle diseases is that patients with these disorders have a limited number of symptom and sign that does not match the large heterogeneity of the etiology. So, in someone who has weakness, that weakness could represent a muscle disease, could represent an anterior horn cell disease, could represent a defect of neuromuscular junction. The clinical history of weakness is not sufficient by itself to make you think about a muscle disease. You have to keep that in the differential diagnosis. But your examination will help in corroborating your suspicion of a muscle disease. Let's say if you have a patient, the patient that you described, with six months’ history of progressive weakness, dysphagia, and that patient has normal reflexes, and the patient has no clinical evidence for muscle fatigability and no sensory loss, then the probability that that patient has a myopathy increases. Dr Albin: Ah, that's really helpful. I'm hearing a lot of it is actually the lack of other findings. In some ways it's asking, you know, have you experienced numbness and tingling? And if not, that’s sort of eliminating that this might not be a neuropathy problem. And then again, that fatigability- obviously fatigability is not specific to a neuromuscular junction, but knowing that is a hallmark of myasthenia, the most common of neuromuscular disorders. Getting that off the table helps you say, okay, well, it's not a neuromuscular junction problem, perhaps. Now we have to think more about, is this a muscle problem itself? Are there any patterns that the patients describe? I have difficulty getting up from a chair, or I have difficulty brushing my hair. When I think of myopathies, I historically have thought of, sort of, more proximal weakness. Is that always true, or not so much? Dr Milone: Yeah. So, there are muscle diseases that involve predominantly proximal weakness. For example, the patient you mentioned earlier could have, for example, an autoimmune muscle disease, a necrotizing autoimmune myopathy; could have, perhaps, dermatomyositis if there are skin changes. But a patient with muscle disease can also present with a different pattern of weakness. So, myopathies can lead to this weakness, and foot drop myopathies can cause- can manifest with the weakness of the calf muscles. So, you may have a patient presenting to the clinic who has no the inability to stand on tiptoes, or you may have a patient who has just facial weakness, who has noted the difficulty sealing their lips on the glasses when they drink and experiencing some drooling in that setting, plus some hand weakness. So, the muscle involved in muscle diseases can vary depending on the underlying cause of the muscle disease. Dr Albin: That's really helpful. So, it really is really keeping an open mind and looking for some supporting features, whether it's bulbar involvement, extraocular eye muscle involvement; looking, you know, is it proximal, is it distal? And then remembering that any of those patterns can also be a muscle problem, even if sometimes we think of distal being more neuropathy and proximal myopathy. Really, there's a host of ranges for this. I really took that away from your article. This is, unfortunately, not just a neat way to box these. We really have to have that broad differential. Let me ask another question about your history. How often do you find that patients complain of, sort of, muscular cramping or muscle pain? And does that help you in terms of deciding what type of myopathy they may have? Dr Milone: Many patients with muscle disease have muscle pain. The muscle pain could signal a presence of inflammation in skeletal muscle, could be the result of overuse from a muscle that is not functioning normally. People who have myotonia experience muscle stiffness and muscle pain. Patients who have a metabolic myopathy usually have exercise-induced muscle pain. But, as we know, muscle pain is also very nonspecific, so we have to try to find out from the patient in what setting the pain specifically occurs. Dr Albin: That's really helpful. So, it's asking a little bit more details about the type of cramping that they have, the type of pain they may be experiencing, to help you refine that differential. Similarly, one of the things that I historically have always associated with myopathies is an elevation in the CK, or the creatinine kinase. How sensitive and specific is that, and how do you as the expert sort of take into account, you know, what their CK may be? Dr Milone: So, this is a very good point. And the elevation of creatine kinase can provide a clue that the patient has a muscle disease, but it is nonspecific for muscle disease because we know that elevation of creatine kinase can occur in the setting of a neurogenic process. For example, we can see elevation of the creatine kinase in patients who have ALS or in patients who have spinal muscular atrophy. And in these patients---for example, those with spinal muscular atrophy---the CK elevation can be also of significantly elevated up to a couple of thousand. Conversely, we can have muscle diseases where the CK elevation does not occur. Examples of these are some genetic muscle disease, but also some acquired muscle diseases. If we think of, for example, cases where inflammation in the muscle occurs in between muscle fibers, more in the interstitium of the muscle, that disease may not lead to significant elevation of the CK. Dr Albin: That's super helpful. So, I'm hearing you say CK may be helpful, but it's neither completely sensitive nor completely specific when we're thinking about myopathic disorders. Dr Milone: You are correct. Dr Albin: Great. So, coming back to our patients, you know, she says that she has this dysphasia. How do bulbar involvement or extraocular eye movement involvement, how do those help narrow your differential? And what sort of disorders are you thinking of for patients who may have that bulbar or extraocular muscle involvement? Dr Milone: Regarding dysphagia, that can occur in the setting of acquired myopathies relatively frequent; for example, in inclusion body myositis or in other forms of inflammatory myopathy. Your patient, I believe, was in their forties, so it's a little bit too young for inclusion body myositis. Involvement of the extraocular muscles is usually much more common in genetic muscle diseases and much less frequent in hereditary muscle disease. So, if there is involvement of the extraocular muscles, and if there is a dysphagia, and if there is a proximal weakness, you may think about oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy, for example. But obviously, in a patient who has only six months of history, we have to pay attention of the degree of weakness the patient has developed since the symptom onset. Because if the degree of weakness is mild, yes, it could still be a genetic or could be an acquired disease. But if we have a patient who, in six months, from being normal became unable to climb stairs, then we worry much more about an acquired muscle disease. Dr Albin: That's really helpful. So, the time force of this is really important. And when you're trying to think about, do I put this in sort of a hereditary form of muscle disease, thinking more of an indolent core, something that's going to be slowly progressive versus one of those inflammatory or necrotizing pathologies, that's going to be a much more quick onset, rapidly progressive, Do I have that right? Dr Milone: In general, the statement is correct. They tend, acquired muscle disease, to have a faster course compared to a muscular dystrophy. But there are exceptions. There have been patients with immune mediated necrotizing myopathy who have been misdiagnosed as having limb-girdle muscular dystrophy just because the disease has been very slowly progressive, and vice versa. There may be some genetic muscle diseases that can present in a relatively fast way. And one of these is a lipid storage myopathy, where some patients may develop subacutely weakness, dysphagia, and even respiratory difficulties. Dr Albin: Again, I'm hearing you say that we really have to have an open mind that myopathies can present in a whole bunch of different ways with a bunch of different phenotypes. And so, keeping that in mind, once you suspect someone has a myopathy, looking at the testing from the EMG perspective and then maybe laboratory testing, how do you use that information to guide your work up? Dr Milone: The EMG has a crucial role in the diagnosis of muscle diseases. Because, as we said earlier, weakness could be the result of muscle disease or other form of neuromuscular disease. If the EMG study will show evidence of muscle disease supporting your diagnostic hypothesis, now you have to decide, is this an acquired muscle disease or is this a genetic muscle disease? If you think that, based on clinical history of, perhaps, subacute pores, it is more likely that the patient has an acquired muscle disease, then I would request a muscle biopsy. The muscle biopsy will look for structural abnormalities that could help in narrowing down the type of muscle disease that the patient has. Dr Albin: That's really helpful. When we're sending people to get muscle biopsies, are there any tips that you would give the listeners in terms of what site to biopsy or what site, maybe, not to biopsy? Dr Milone: This is a very important point. A muscle biopsy has the highest diagnostic yield if it's done in a muscle that is weak. And because muscle diseases can result in proximal or distal weakness, if your patient has distal weakness, you should really biopsy a distal muscle. However, we do not wish to biopsy a muscle that is too weak, because otherwise the biopsy sample will result just in fibrous and fatty connected tissue. So, we want to biopsy a muscle that has mild to moderate weakness. Dr Albin: Great. So, a little Goldilocks phenomenon: has to be some weak, but not too weak. You got to get just the right feature there. I love that. That's a really good pearl for our listeners to take. What about on the flip side? Let's say you don't think it's an acquired a muscular disease. How are you handling testing in that situation? Dr Milone: If you think the patient has a genetic muscle disease, you pay a lot of attention to the distribution of the weakness. Ask yourself, what is the best pattern that represent the patient's weakness? So, if I have a patient who has facial weakness, dysphagia, muscle cramping, and then on examination represent myotonia, then at that point we can go straight to a genetic test for myotonic dystrophy type one. Dr Albin: That's super helpful. Dr Milone: So, you request directly that generic test and wait for the result. If positive, you will have proof that your diagnostic hypothesis was correct. Dr Albin: You're using the genetic testing to confirm your hypothesis, not just sending a whole panel of them. You're really informing that testing based on the patient's pattern of weakness and the exam findings, and sometimes even the EMG findings as well. Is that correct? Dr Milone: You are correct, and ideally, yes. And this is true for certain muscle diseases. In addition to myotonic dystrophy type one, for example, if you have a patient who has fascial scapulohumeral muscular weakness, you can directly request a test for FSHD. So, the characterization of the clinical phenotype is crucial before selecting the genetic test for diagnosis. Dr Albin: Wonderful. Dr Milone: However, this is not always possible, because you may have a patient who has just a limb-girdle weakness, and the limb-girdle weakness can be limb-girdle muscular dystrophy. But we know that there are many, many types of limb-girdle muscular dystrophies. Therefore, the phenotype is not sufficient to request specific genetic tests for one specific form of a limb-girdle muscular dystrophy. And in those cases, more complex next-generation sequencing panels have a higher chance of providing the answer. Dr Albin: Got it, that makes sense. So, sometimes we're using a specific genetic test; sometimes, it is unfortunate that we just cannot narrow down to one disease that we might be looking for, and we may need a panel in that situation. Dr Milone: You are correct. Dr Albin: Fantastic. Well, as we wrap up, is there anything on the horizon for muscular disorders that you're really excited about? Dr Milone: Yes, there are a lot of exciting studies ongoing for gene therapy, gene editing. So, these studies are very promising for the treatment of genetic muscle disease, and I'm sure there will be therapists that will improve the patient's quality of life and the disease outcome. Dr Albin: It's really exciting. Well, thank you again. Today I've been interviewing Dr Margarita Malone on her article on a pattern recognition approach to myopathy, which appears in the October 2025 Continuum issue on muscle and neuromuscular junction disorders. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining us today. And thank you, Dr Milone. Dr Milone: Thank you, Casey. Very nice chatting with you about this. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/38132955
info_outline
Multidisciplinary Treatment for Functional Movement Disorder With Dr. Jon Stone
10/01/2025
Multidisciplinary Treatment for Functional Movement Disorder With Dr. Jon Stone
Functional movement disorders are a common clinical concern for neurologists. The principle of “rule-in” diagnosis, which involves demonstrating the difference between voluntary and automatic movement, can be carried through to explanation, triage, and evidence-based multidisciplinary rehabilitation therapy. In this episode, Gordon Smith, MD, FAAN speaks Jon Stone, PhD, MB, ChB, FRCP, an author of the article “Multidisciplinary Treatment for Functional Movement Disorder” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Smith is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a professor and chair of neurology at Kenneth and Dianne Wright Distinguished Chair in Clinical and Translational Research at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia. Dr. Stone is a consultant neurologist and honorary professor of neurology at the Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences at the University of Edinburgh in Edinburgh, United Kingdom. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. This exclusive Continuum Audio interview is available only to you, our subscribers. We hope you enjoy it. Thank you for listening. Dr Smith: Hello, this is Dr Gordon Smith. Today I've got the great pleasure of interviewing Dr Johnstone about his article on the multidisciplinary treatment for functional neurologic disorder, which he wrote with Dr Alan Carson. This article will appear in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. I will say, Jon, that as a Continuum Audio interviewer, I usually take the interviews that come my way, and I'm happy about it. I learn something every time. They're all a lot of fun. But there have been two instances where I go out and actively seek to interview someone, and you are one of them. So, I'm super excited that they allowed me to talk with you today. For those of our listeners who understand or are familiar with FND, Dr Stone is a true luminary and a leader in this, both in clinical care and research. He's also a true humanist. And I have a bit of a bias here, but he was the first awardee of the Ted Burns Humanism in Neurology award, which is a real honor and reflective of your great work. So welcome to the podcast, Jon. Maybe you can introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Stone: Well, thank you so much, Gordon. It was such a pleasure to get that award, the Ted Burns Award, because Ted was such a great character. I think the spirit of his podcasts is seen in the spirit of these podcasts as well. So, I'm a neurologist in Edinburgh in Scotland. I'm from England originally. I'm very much a general neurologist still. I still work full-time. I do general neurology, acute neurology, and I do two FND clinics a week. I have a research group with Alan Carson, who you mentioned; a very clinical research group, and we've been doing that for about 25 years. Dr Smith: I really want to hear more about your clinical approach and how you run the clinic, but I wonder if it would be helpful for you to maybe provide a definition. What's the definition of a functional movement disorder? I mean, I think all of us see these patients, but it's actually nice to have a definition. Dr Stone: You know, that's one of the hardest things to do in any paper on FND. And I'm involved with the FND society, and we're trying to get together a definition. It's very hard to get an overarching definition. But from a movement disorder point of view, I think you're looking at a disorder where there is an impairment of voluntary movement, where you can demonstrate that there is an automatic movement, which is normal in the same movement. I mean, that's a very clumsy way of saying it. Ultimately, it's a disorder that's defined by the clinical features it has; a bit like saying, what is migraine? You know? Or, what is MS? You know, it's very hard to actually say that in a sentence. I think these are disorders of brain function at a very broad level, and particularly with FND disorders, of a sort of higher control of voluntary movement, I would say. Dr Smith: There's so many pearls in this article and others that you've written. One that I really like is that this isn't a diagnosis of exclusion, that this is an affirmative diagnosis that have clear diagnostic signs. And I wonder if you can talk a little bit about the diagnostic process, arriving at an FND diagnosis for a patient. Dr Stone: I think this is probably the most important sort of “switch-around” in the last fifteen, twenty years since I've been involved. It's not new information. You know, all of these diagnostic signs were well known in the 19th century; and in fact, many of them were described then as well. But they were kind of lost knowledge, so that by the time we got to the late nineties, this area---which was called conversion disorder then---it was written down. This is a diagnosis of exclusion that you make when you've ruled everything out. But in fact, we have lots of rule in signs, which I hope most listeners are familiar with. So, if you've got someone with a functional tremor, you would do a tremor entrainment test where you do rhythmic movements of your thumb and forefinger, ask the patient to copy them. It's very important that they copy you rather than make their own movements. And see if their tremor stops briefly, or perhaps entrains to the same rhythm that you're making, or perhaps they just can't make the movement. That might be one example. There's many examples for limb weakness and dystonia. There's a whole lot of stuff to learn there, basically, clinical skills. Dr Smith: You make a really interesting point early on in your article about the importance of the neurological assessment as part of the treatment of the patient. I wonder if you could talk to our listeners about that. Dr Stone: So, I think, you know, there's a perception that- certainly, there was a perception that that the neurologist is there to make a diagnosis. When I was training, the neurologist was there to tell the patient that they didn't have the kind of neurological problem and to go somewhere else. But in fact, that treatment process, when it goes well, I think begins from the moment you greet the patient in the waiting room, shake their hand, look at them. Things like asking the patient about all their symptoms, being the first doctor who's ever been interested in their, you know, horrendous exhaustion or their dizziness. You know, questions that many patients are aware that doctors often aren't very interested in. These are therapeutic opportunities, you know, as well as just taking the history that enable the patient to feel relaxed. They start thinking, oh, this person's actually interested in me. They're more likely to listen to what you've got to say if they get that feeling off you. So, I'd spend a lot of time going through physical symptoms. I go through time asking the patient what they do, and the patients will often tell you what they don't do. They say, I used to do this, I used to go running. Okay, you need to know that, but what do they actually do? Because that's such valuable information for their treatment plan. You know, they list a whole lot of TV shows that they really enjoy, they're probably not depressed. So that's kind of useful information. I also spend a lot of time talking to them about what they think is wrong. Be careful, that they can annoy patients, you know. Well, I've come to you because you're going to tell me what's wrong. But what sort of ideas had you had about what was wrong? I need to know so that I can deal with those ideas that you've had. Is there a particular reason that you're in my clinic today? Were you sent here? Was it your idea? Are there particular treatments that you think would really help you? These all set the scene for what's going to come later in terms of your explanation. And, more importantly, your triaging of the patient. Is this somebody where it's the right time to be embarking on treatment, which is a question we don't always ask yourself, I think. Dr Smith: That's a really great point and kind of segues to my next question, which is- you talked a little bit about this, right? Generally speaking, we have come up with this is a likely diagnosis earlier, midway through the encounter. And you talked a little bit about how to frame the encounter, knowing what's coming up. And then what's coming up is sharing with the patient our opinion. In your article, you point out this should be no different than telling someone they have Parkinson's disease, for instance. What pearls do you have and what pitfalls do you have in how to give the diagnosis? And, you know, a lot of us really weren't trained to do this. What's the right way, and what are the most common land mines that folks step on when they're trying to share this information with patients? Dr Stone: I've been thinking about this for a long time, and I've come to the conclusion that all we need to do with this disorder is stop being weird. What goes wrong? The main pitfall is that people think, oh God, this is FND, this is something a bit weird. It's in a different box to all of the other things and I have to do something weird. And people end up blurting out things like, well, your scan was normal or, you haven't got epilepsy or, you haven't got Parkinson's disease. That's not what you normally do. It's weird. What you normally do is you take a deep breath and you say, I'm sorry to tell you've got Parkinson's disease or, you have this type of dystonia. That's what you normally say. If you follow the normal- what goes wrong is that people don't follow the normal rules. The patient picks up on this. What's going on here? This doctor's telling me what I don't have and then they're starting to talk about some reason why I've got this, like stress, even though I don't- haven't been told what it is yet. You do the normal rules, give it a name, a name that you're comfortable with, preferably as specific as possible: functional tremor, functional dystonia. And then do what you normally do, which is explain to the patient why you think it's this. So, if someone's got Parkinson's, you say, I think you've got Parkinson's because I noticed that you're walking very slowly and you've got a tremor. And these are typical features of Parkinson. And so, you're talking about the features. This is where I think it's the most useful thing that you can do. And the thing that I do when it goes really well and it's gone badly somewhere else, the thing I probably do best, what was most useful, is showing the patient their signs. I don't know if you do that, Gordon, but it's maybe not something that we're used to doing. Dr Smith: Wait, maybe you can talk more about that, and maybe, perhaps, give an example? Talk about how that impacts treatment. I was really impressed about the approach to physical therapy, and treatment of patients really leverages the physical examination findings that we're all well-trained to look for. So maybe explore that a little bit. Dr Stone: Yeah, I think absolutely it does. And I think we've been evolving these thoughts over the last ten or fifteen years. But I started, you know, maybe about twenty years ago, started to show people their tremor entrainment tests. Or their Hoover sign, for example; if you don't know Hoover sign, weakness of hip extension, that comes back to normal when the person's flexing their normal leg, their normal hip. These are sort of diagnostic tricks that we had. Ahen I started writing articles about FND, various senior neurologists said to me, are you sure you should write this stuff down? Patients will find out. I wrote an article with Marc Edwards called “Trick or Treat in Neurology” about fifteen years ago to say that actually, although they're they might seem like tricks, there really are treats for patients because you're bringing the diagnosis into the clinic room. It's not about the normal scan. You can have FND and MS. It's not about the normal scan. It's about what you're seeing in front of you. If you show that patient, yes, you can't move your leg. The more you try, the worse it gets. I can see that. But look, lift up your other leg. Let me show you. Can you see now how strong your leg is? It's such a powerful way of communicating to the patient what's wrong with them diagnostically, giving them that confidence. What it's also doing is showing them the potential for improvement. It's giving them some hope, which they badly need. And, as we'll perhaps talk about, the physio treatment uses that as well because we have to use a different kind of physio for many forms of functional movement disorder, which relies on just glimpsing these little moments of normal function and promoting them, promoting the automatic movement, squashing down that abnormal pattern of voluntary movement that people have got with FND. Dr Smith: So, maybe we can talk about that now. You know, I've got a bunch of other questions to ask you about mechanism and stuff, but let's talk about the approach to physical therapy because it's such a good lead-in and I always worry that our physical therapists aren't knowledgeable about this. So, maybe some examples, you have some really great ones in the article. And then words of wisdom for us as we're engaging physical therapists who may not be familiar with FND, how to kind of build that competency and relationship with the therapist with whom you work. Dr Stone: Some of the stuff is the same. Some of the rehabilitation ideas are similar, thinking about boom and bust activity, which is very common in these patients, or grading activity. That's similar, but some of them are really different. So, if you have a patient with a stroke, the physiotherapist might be very used to getting that person to think and look at their leg to try and help them move, which is part of their rehabilitation. In FND, that makes things worse. That's what's happening in Hoover sign and tremor entrainment sign. Attention towards the limb is making it worse. But if the patient's on board with the diagnosis and understands it, they'll also see what you need to do, then, in the physio is actively use distraction in a very transparent way and say to the patient, look, I think if I get you to do that movement, and I'll film you, I think your movement's going to look better. Wouldn't that be great if we could demonstrate that? And the patient says, yeah, that would be great. We're kind of actively using distraction. We're doing things that would seem a bit strange for someone with other forms of movement disorder. So, the patients, for example, with functional gait disorders who you discover can jog quite well on a treadmill. In fact, that's another diagnostic test. Or they can walk backwards, or they can dance or pretend that they're ice skating, and they have much more fluid movements because their ice skating program in their brain is not corrupted, but their normal walking program is. So, can you then turn ice skating or jogging into normal walking? It's not that complicated, I think. The basic ideas are pretty simple, but it does require some creativity from whoever's doing the therapy because you have to use what the patient's into. So, if the patient used to be a dancer- we had a patient who was a, she was really into ballet dancing. Her ballet was great, but her walking was terrible. So, they used ballet to help her walk again. And that's incredibly satisfying for the therapist as well. So, if you have a therapist who's not sure, there are consensus recommendations. There are videos. One really good success often makes a therapist want to do that again and think, oh, that's interesting. I really helped that patient get better. Dr Smith: For a long time, this has been framed as a mental health issue, conversion disorder, and maybe we can talk a little bit about early life of trauma as a risk factor. But, you know, listening to you talk, it sounds like a brain network problem. Even the word “functional”, to me, it seems a little judgmental. I don't know if this is the best term, but is this really a network problem? Dr Stone: The word “functional”, for most neurologists, sounds judgmental because of what you associate it with. If you think about what the word actually is, it's- it does what it says on the tin. There's a disordered brain function. I mean, it's not a great word. It's the least worst term, in my view. And yes, of course it's a brain network problem, because what other organ is it going to be? You know, that's gone wrong? When software brains go wrong, they go wrong in networks. But I think we have to be careful not to swing that pendulum too far to the other side because the problem here, when we say asking the question, is this a mental health problem or a neurological one, we're just asking the wrong question. We're asking a question that makes no sense. However you try and answer that, you're going to get a stupid answer because the question doesn't make sense. We shouldn't have those categories. It's one organ. And what's so fascinating about FND---and I hope what can incite your sort of curiosity about it---is this disorder which defies this categorization. You see some patients with it, they say, oh, they've got a brain network disorder. Then you meet another patient who was sexually abused for five years by their uncle when they were nine, between nine and fourteen; they developed an incredibly strong dissociative threat response into that experience. They have crippling anxiety, PTSD, interpersonal problems, and their FND is sort of somehow a part of that; part of that experience that they've had. So, to ignore that or to deny or dismiss psychological, psychiatric aspects, is just as bad and just as much a mistake as to dismiss the kind of neurological aspects as well. Dr Smith: I wonder if this would be a good time to go back and talk a little bit about a concept that I found really interesting, and that is FND as a prodromal syndrome before a different neurological problem. So, for instance, FND prodromal to Parkinson's disease. Can you talk to us a little bit about that? I mean, obviously I was familiar with the fact that patients who have nonepileptic seizurelike events often have epileptic seizures, but the idea of FND ahead of Parkinson's was new to me. Dr Stone: So, this is definitely a thing that happens. It's interesting because previously, perhaps, if you saw someone who was referred with a functional tremor---this has happened to me and my colleagues. They send me some with a functional tremor. By the time I see them, it's obvious they've got Parkinson's because it's been a little gap. But it turns out that the diagnosis of functional tremor was wrong. It was just that they've developed that in the prodrome of Parkinson's disease. And if you think about it, it's what you'd expect, really, especially with Parkinson's disease. We know people develop anxiety in the prodrome of Parkinson's for ten, fifteen years before it's part of the prodrome. Anxiety is a very strong risk factor for FND, and they're already developing abnormalities in their brain predisposing them to tremor. So, you put those two things together, why wouldn't people get FND? It is interesting to think about how that's the opposite of seizures, because most people with comorbidity of functional seizures and epilepsy, 99% of the time the epilepsy came first. They had the experience of an epileptic seizure, which is frightening, which evokes strong threat response and has somehow then led to a recapitulation of that experience in a functional seizure. So yeah, it's really interesting how these disorders overlap. We're seeing something...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431845
info_outline
Paroxysmal Movement Disorders With Dr. Abhimanyu Mahajan
09/24/2025
Paroxysmal Movement Disorders With Dr. Abhimanyu Mahajan
Paroxysmal movement disorders refer to a group of highly heterogeneous disorders that present with attacks of involuntary movements without loss of consciousness. These disorders demonstrate considerable and ever-expanding genetic and clinical heterogeneity, so an accurate clinical diagnosis has key therapeutic implications. In this episode, Kait Nevel, MD, speaks with Abhimanyu Mahajan, MD, MHS, FAAN, author of the article “Paroxysmal Movement Disorders” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Nevel is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a neurologist and neuro-oncologist at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, Indiana. Dr. Mahajan is an assistant professor of neurology and rehabilitation medicine at the James J. and Joan A. Gardner Family Center for Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders at the University of Cincinnati in Cincinnati, Ohio. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Doctor Lyell Jones, editor in chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Nevel: Hello, this is Dr Kait Nevel. Today I'm interviewing doctor Abhi Mahajan about his article on diagnosis and management of paroxysmal movement disorders, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Abhi, welcome to the podcast and please introduce yourself to the audience. Dr Mahajan: Thank you, Kait. Thank you for inviting me. My name is Abhi Mahajan. I'm an assistant professor of neurology and rehabilitation medicine at the University of Cincinnati in Cincinnati, Ohio. I'm happy to be here. Dr Nevel: Wonderful. Well, I'm really excited to talk to you about your article today on this very interesting and unique set of movement disorders. So, before we get into your article a little bit more, I think just kind of the set the stage for the discussion so that we're all on the same page. Could you start us off with some definitions? What are paroxysmal movement disorders? And generally, how do we start to kind of categorize these in our minds? Dr Mahajan: So, the term paroxysmal movement disorders refers to a group of highly heterogeneous disorders. These may present with attacks of involuntary movements, commonly a combination of dystonia and chorea, or ataxia, or both. These movements are typically without loss of consciousness and may follow, may follow, so with or without known triggers. In terms of the classification, these have been classified in a number of ways. Classically, these have been classified based on the trigger. So, if the paroxysmal movement disorder follows activity, these are called kinesigenic, paroxysmal, kinesigenic dyskinesia. If they are not followed by activity, they're called non kinesigenic dyskinesia and then if they've followed prolonged activity or exercise they're called paroxysmal exercise induced dyskinesia. There's a separate but related group of protogynous movement disorders called episodic attacks here that can have their own triggers. Initially this was the classification that was said. Subsequent classifications have placed their focus on the ideology of these attacks that could be familiar or acquired and of course understanding of familiar or genetic causes of paroxysmal movement disorders keeps on expanding and so on and so forth. And more recently, response to pharmacotherapy and specific clinical features have also been introduced into the classification. Dr Nevel: Great, thank you for that. Can you share with us what you think is the most important takeaway from your article for the practicing neurologist? Dr Mahajan: Absolutely. I think it's important to recognize that everything that looks and sounds bizarre should not be dismissed as malingering. Such hyperkinetic and again in quotations, “bizarre movements”. They may appear functional to the untrained eye or the lazy eye. These movements can be diagnosed. Paroxysmal movement disorders can be diagnosed with a good clinical history and exam and may be treated with a lot of success with medications that are readily available and cheap. So, you can actually make a huge amount of difference to your patients’ lives by practicing old-school neurology. Dr Nevel: That's great, thank you so much for that. I can imagine that scenario does come up where somebody is thought to have a functional neurological disorder but really has a proximal movement disorder. You mentioned that in your article, how it's important to distinguish between these two, how there can be similarities at times. Do you mind giving us a little bit more in terms of how do we differentiate between functional neurologic disorder and paroxysmal movement disorder? Dr Mahajan: So clinical differentiation of functional neurological disorder from paroxysmal movement disorders, of course it's really important as a management is completely different, but it can be quite challenging. There's certainly an overlap. So, there can be an overlap with presentation, with phenomenology. Paroxysmal nature is common to both of them. In addition, FND and PMD's may commonly share triggers, whether they are movement, physical exercise. Other triggers include emotional stimuli, even touch or auditory stimuli. What makes it even more challenging is that FND’s may coexist with other neurological disorders, including paroxysmal movement disorders. However, there are certain specific phenom phenotypic differences that have been reported. So specific presentations, for example the paroxysms may look different. Each paroxysm may look different in functional neurological disorders, specific phenotypes like paroxysmal akinesia. So, these are long duration episodes with eyes closed. Certain kinds of paroxysmal hyperkinesia with ataxia and dystonia have been reported. Of course. More commonly we see PNES of paroxysmal nonepileptic spells or seizures that may be considered paroxysmal movement disorders but represent completely different etiology which is FND. Within the world of movement disorders, functional jerks may resemble propiospinal myoclonus which is a completely different entity. Overall, there are certain things that help separate functional movement disorders from paroxysmal movement disorders, such as an acute onset variable and inconsistent phenomenology. They can be suggestibility, distractibility, entrainment, the use of an EMG may show a B-potential (Bereitschaftspotential) preceding the movement in patients with FND. So, all of these cues are really helpful. Dr Nevel: Great, thanks. When you're seeing a patient who's reporting to these paroxysmal uncontrollable movements, what kind of features of their story really tips you off that this might be a proximal movement disorder? Dr Mahajan: Often these patients have been diagnosed with functional neurological disorders and they come to us. But for me, whenever the patient and or the family talk about episodic movements, I think about these. Honestly, we must be aware that there is a possibility that the movements that the patients are reporting that you may not see in clinic. Maybe there are obvious movement disorders. Specifically, there's certain clues that you should always ask for in the history, for example, ask for the age of onset, a description of movements. Patients typically have videos or families have videos. You may not be able to see them in clinic. The regularity of frequency of these movements, how long the attacks are, is there any family history of or not? On the basis of triggers, whether, as I mentioned before, do these follow exercise? Prolonged exercise? Or neither of the above? What is the presentation in between attacks, which I think is a very important clinical clue. Your examination may be limited to videos, but it's important not just to examine the video which represents the patient during an attack, but in between attacks. That is important. And of course, I suspect we'll get to the treatment, but the treatment can follow just this part, the history and physical exam. It may be refined with further testing, including genetic testing. Dr Nevel: Great. On the note of genetic testing, when you do suspect a diagnosis of paroxysmal movement disorder, what are some key points for the provider to be aware of about genetic testing? How do we go about that? I know that there are lots of different options for genetic testing and it gets complicated. What do you suggest? Dr Mahajan: Traditionally, things were a little bit easier, right, because we had a couple of genes that have been associated with the robust movement disorders. So, genetic testing included single gene testing, testing for PRRT2 followed by SLC2A. And if these were negative, you said, well, this is not a genetic ideology for paroxysmal movement disorders. Of course, with time that has changed. There's an increase in known genes and variants. There is increased genetic entropy. So, the same genetic mutation may present with many phenotypes and different genetic mutations may present with the similar phenotype. Single gene testing is not a high yield approach. Overall genetic investigations for paroxysmal movement disorders use next generation sequencing or whole exome sequence panels which allow for sequencing of multiple genes simultaneously. The reported diagnostic yield with let's say next generation sequencing is around 35 to 50 percent. Specific labs at centers have developed their own panels which may improve the yield of course. In children, microarray may be considered, especially the presentation includes epilepsy or intellectual disability because copy number variations may not be detected by a whole exome sequencing or next generation sequencing. Overall, I will tell you that I'm certainly not an expert in genetics, so whenever you're considering genetic testing, if possible, please utilize the expertise of a genetic counsellor. Families want to know, especially as an understanding of the molecular underpinnings and knowledge about associated mutations or variations keeps on expanding. We need to incorporate their expertise. A variant of unknown significance, which is quite a common result with genetic testing, may not be a variant of unknown significance next year may be reclassified as pathogenic. So, this is extremely important. Dr Nevel: Yeah. That's such a good point. Thank you. And you just mentioned that there are some genetic mutations that can lead to multiple different phenotypes. Seemingly similar phenotypes can be associated with various genetic mutations. What's our understanding of that? Do we have an understanding of that? Why there is this seeming disconnect at times between the specific genetic mutation and the phenotype? Dr Mahajan: That is a tough question to answer for all paroxysmal movement disorders because the answer may be specific to a specific mutation. I think a great example is the CACNA1A mutation. It is a common cause of episodic ataxia type 2. Depending on when the patient presents, you can have a whole gamut of clinical presentations. So, if the patient is 1 year old, the patient can present with epileptic encephalopathy. Two to 5 years, it can be benign paroxysmal torticollis of infancy. Five to 10 years, can present with learning difficulties with absence epilepsy and then of course later, greater than 10 years, with episodic ataxia (type) 2 hemiplegic migraine and then a presentation with progressive ataxia and hemiplegic migraines has also been reported. So not just episodic progressive form of ataxia has also been reported. I think overall these disorders are very rare. They are even more infrequently diagnosed than their prevalence. As such, the point that different genetic mutations present with different phenotypes, or the same genetic mutation I may present with different phenotypes could also represent this part. Understanding of the clinical presentation is really incomplete and forever growing. There's a new case report or case series every other month, which makes this a little bit challenging, but that's all the more reason for learning about them and for constant vigilance for patients who show up to our clinic. Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely. What is our current understanding of the associated pathophysiology of these conditions and the pathophysiology relating to the genetics? And then how does that relate to the treatment of these conditions? Dr Mahajan: So, a number of different disease mechanisms have been proposed. Traditionally, these were all thought to be ion channelopathies, but a number of different processes have been proposed now. So, depending on the genetic mutation that you talk about. So certain mutations can involve ion channels such as CACMA1A, ATP1A3. It can involve solute carriers, synaptic vesicle fusion, energy metabolism such as ECHS1, synthesis of neurotransmitters such as GCH1. So, there are multiple processes that may be involved. I think overall for the practicing clinician such as me, I think there is a greater need for us to understand the underlying genetics and associated phenotypes and the molecular mechanisms specifically because these can actually influence treatment decisions, right? So, you mentioned that specific genetic testing understanding of the underlying molecular mechanism can influence specific treatments. As an example, a patient presenting with proximal nocturnal dyskinesia with mutation in the ADCY5 gene may respond beautifully to caffeine. Other examples if you have SLC2A1, so gluc-1 (glucose transporter type 1) mutation, a ketogenic diet may work really well. If you have PDHA1 mutation that may respond to thiamine and so on and so forth. There are certain patients where paroxysmal movement disorders are highly disabling and you may consider deep brain stimulation. That's another reason why it may be important to understand genetic mutations because there is literature on response to DBS with certain mutations versus others. Helps like counselling for patients and families, and of course introduces time, effort, and money spent in additional testing. Dr Nevel: Other than genetic testing, what other diagnostic work up do you consider when you're evaluating patients with a suspected paroxysmal movement disorder? Are there specific things in the history or on exam that would prompt you to do certain testing to look for perhaps other things in your differential when you're first evaluating a patient? Dr Mahajan: In this article, I provide a flow chart that helps me assess these patients as well. I think overall the history taking and neurological exam outside of these paroxysms is really important. So, the clinical exam in between these episodic events, for example, for history, specific examples include, well, when do these paroxysms happen? Do they happen or are they precipitated with meals that might indicate that there's something to do with glucose metabolism? Do they follow exercise? So, a specific example is in Moyamoya disease, they can be limb shaking that follows exercise. So, which gives you a clue to what the etiology could be. Of course, family history is important, but again, talking about the exam in between episodes, you know, this is actually a great point because out– we've talked about genetics, we've talked about idiopathic paroxysmal movement disorders, –but a number of these disorders are because of acquired causes. Well, of course it's important because acquired causes such as autoimmune causes, so multiple sclerosis, ADEM, lupus, LGI1, all of these NMDAR, I mentioned Moyamoya disease and metabolic causes. Of course, you can consider FND as under-acquired as well. But all of these causes have very different treatments and they have very different prognosis. So, I think it's extremely important for us to look into the history with a fine comb and then examine these patients in between these episodes and keep our mind open about acquired causes as well. Dr Nevel: When you evaluate these patients, are you routinely ordering vascular imaging and autoimmune kind of serologies and things like that to evaluate for these other acquired causes or it does it really just depend on the clinical presentation of the patient? Dr Mahajan: It mostly depends on the clinical presentation. I mean, if the exam is let's say completely normal, there are no other risk factors in a thirty year old, then you know, with a normal exam, normal history, no other risk factors. I may not order an MRI of the brain. But if the patient is 55 or 60 (years) with vascular risk factors, then you have to be mindful that this could be a TIA. If the patient has let's say in the 30s and in between these episodes too has basically has a sequel of these paroxysms, then you may want to consider autoimmune. I think the understanding of paraneoplastic, even autoimmune disorders, is expanding as well. So, you know the pattern matters. So, if all of this is subacute started a few months ago, then I have a low threshold for ordering testing for autoimmune and paraneoplastic ideology is simply because it makes such a huge difference in terms of how you approach the treatment and the long-term prognosis. Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely. What do you find most challenging about the management of patients with paroxysmal movement disorders? And then also what is most rewarding? Dr Mahajan: I think the answer to both those questions is, is the same. The first thing is there's so much advancement in what we know and how we understand these disorders so regularly that it's really hard to keep on track. Even for this article, it took me a few months to write this article, and between the time and I started and when I ended, there were new papers to include new case reports, case series, right? So, these are rare disorders. So most of our understanding for these disorders comes from case reports and case series, and it's in a constant state of advancement. I think that is the most challenging part, but it's also the most interesting part as well. I think the challenging and interesting part is the heterogeneity of presentation as well. These can involve just one part of your body, your entire body can present with paroxysmal events, with multiple different phenomenologies and they might change over time. So overall, it's highly rewarding to diagnose such patients in clinic. As I said before, you can make a sizeable difference with the medication which is usually inexpensive, which is obviously a great point to mention these days in our health system. But with anti-seizure drugs, you can put the right diagnosis, you can make a huge difference. I just wanted to make a point that this is not minimizing in any way the validity or the importance of diagnosing patients with functional neurological disorders correctly. Both of them are as organic. The importance is the treatment is completely different. So, if you're diagnosing somebody with FND and they do have FND and they get cognitive behavioral therapy and they get better, that's fantastic. But if somebody has paroxysmal movement disorders and they undergo cognitive behavioral therapy and they're not doing well, that doesn't help anybody. Dr Nevel: One hundred percent. As providers, obviously we all want to help our patients and having the correct diagnosis, you know, is the first step. What is most interesting to you about paroxysmal movement disorders? Dr Mahajan: So outside of the above, there are some unanswered questions that I find very interesting. Specifically, the overlap with...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431780
info_outline
Tourette Syndrome and Tic Disorders With Dr. Jessica Frey
09/17/2025
Tourette Syndrome and Tic Disorders With Dr. Jessica Frey
Tics are movements or sounds that are quick, recurrent, and nonrhythmic. They fluctuate over time and can be involuntary or semivoluntary. Although behavioral therapy remains the first-line treatment, modifications to comprehensive behavioral intervention have been developed to make treatment more accessible. In this episode, Casey Albin, MD, speaks with Jessica Frey, MD, author of the article “Tourette Syndrome and Tic Disorders” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Albin is a Continuum® Audio interviewer, associate editor of media engagement, and an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Frey is an assistant professor of neurology, Movement Disorders Fellowship Program Director, and Neurology Student Clerkship Director at the Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute in the department of neurology at West Virginia University in Morgantown, West Virginia. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Transcript Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Albin: Hi all, this is Dr Casey Albin. Today I'm interviewing Dr Jessica Frey about her article Tourette Syndrome and Tic Disorders, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Dr Frey, thank you so much for being here, and welcome to the podcast. I'd love for you to briefly introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Frey: Thank you for having me here today. My name is Jessica Frey, and I am a movement disorder specialist at West Virginia University. I'm also the movement disorder fellowship director, as well as the neurology clerkship student director. Dr Albin: Dr. Frey, I feel like this was one of the things I actually had no exposure to as a resident. For trainees that kind of want to get a better understanding of how these are managed, what kind of counseling you do, what kind of interventions you're using, how can they get a little bit more exposure? Dr Frey: That's a great question, and I actually had a similar experience to you. I did not see that many patients with Tourette syndrome while I was in my residency training. I got a lot more exposure during my fellowship training, and that's when I actually fell in love with that patient population, caring for them, seeing them be successful. I think it depends on the program that you're in. During the pediatric neurology rotation might be your best bet to getting exposure to patients with Tourette syndrome, since a lot of them are going to be diagnosed when they're quite young, and sometimes they'll even continue to follow through young adulthood in the pediatric neurology clinic. However, up to 20% of patients with Tourette syndrome will have persistent tics during adulthood. And so, I think it is important for neurology trainees to understand how to manage them, understand what resources are out there. So, if you have an interest in that, absolutely try to follow either in the pediatric neurology department, or if you have a movement disorder program that has a Tourette clinic or has a movement disorder specialist who has an interest in Tourette syndrome, definitely try to hang out with them. Get to know that patient population, and educate yourself as much as you're able to educate the patients as well. Dr Albin: Yeah, I think that's fantastic advice. You wrote a fantastic article, and it covers a lot of ground. And I think let's start at some of the basics. When I think of Tourette syndrome and tics, I think of Tourette syndrome having tics, but maybe not all patients who have tics have Tourette syndrome. And so, I was wondering, A, if you could confirm that's true; and then could you tell us a little bit about some of the diagnostic criteria for each of these conditions? Dr Frey: Sure. So, a tic is a phenomenological description. So basically, what you're seeing is a description of a motor or phonic tic, which is a particular type of movement disorder. Tourette syndrome is a very specific diagnosis, and the diagnostic criteria for Tourette syndrome at this point in time is that you need to have had at least one phonic tic and two or more motor tics over the course of at least a year before the age of eighteen. Dr Albin: Got it. So, there's certainly more specific and a lot more criteria for having Tourette syndrome. I was struck in reading your article how many myths there are surrounding Tourette syndrome and tic disorders kind of in general. What's known about the pathophysiology of Tourette syndrome, and what are some common misconceptions about patients who have this disorder? Dr Frey: Yeah, so I think that's a really excellent question because for so many years, Tourette syndrome and tic disorders in general were thought to be psychogenic in origin, even dating back to when they were first described. The history of Tourette syndrome is quite interesting in that, when Tourette---who, you know, it’s named after---was working with Charcot, a lot of the initial descriptors were of actual case reports of patients who had more psychogenic descriptions, and eventually they became known as tic disorders as well. It wasn't until the discovery of Haldol and using Haldol as a treatment for tic disorders that people started to change their perception and say, okay, maybe there is actually a neurologic basis for Tourette syndrome. So, in terms of the pathophysiology, it's not completely known, but what we do know about it, we think that there is some sort of hyperactivity in the corticostriatal-thalamocortical circuits. And we think that because of this hyperactivity, it leads to the hyperactive movement disorder. We think similar circuitry is involved in conditions like OCD, or obsessive compulsive disorder; as well as ADHD, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. And because of that, we actually do tend to see an overlap between all three of these conditions in both individuals and families. Dr Albin: And hearing all of that, does this all come back to, sort of, dopamine and, sort of, behavioral motivation, or is it different than that? Dr Frey: It's probably more complex than just dopamine, but there is the thought that dopamine does play a role. And even one of the hypotheses regarding the pathophysiology is actually that these tics might start as habits, and then when the habits become more common, they actually reshape the dopaminergic pathways. And each time a tic occurs, there's a little bit of a dopaminergic reward. And so over time, that reshapes those hyperactive pathways and changes the actual circuitry of the brain, leading it to be not just a habit but part of their neurologic makeup. Dr Albin: It's fascinating to hear how that actually might play into our neural circuitry and, over time, rewire our brain. Fascinating. I mean, this is just so interesting how movement disorders play into such behavioral regulation and some comorbid conditions like ADHD and OCD. I thought it would be really helpful, maybe, to our listeners to kind of think through a case that I suspect is becoming more common. So, if it's okay with you, I'll present sort of a hypothetical. Dr Frey: Absolutely. Dr Albin: This is a father bringing in his seventeen-year-old daughter. She's coming into the clinic because she's been demonstrating, over the past four to six weeks, some jerking movement in her right arm. And it's happened multiple times a day. And it was a pretty sudden onset. She had not had any movement like this before, and then several weeks ago, started moving the right hand. And then it became even more disruptive: her right leg was involved, she had some scrunching her face. This is all happening at a time where she was dealing with some stress, maybe a little bit of applications around college that she was having a lot of anxiety about. How do you sort of approach this case if this is someone who comes to your office? Dr Frey: Sure. So, I think the first thing that you want to get is a good solid history, trying to understand, what is the origin of these abnormal movements and what led to the abnormal movements. Now, a key thing here is that in Tourette syndrome, and most physiologic tic syndromes, there's a pretty early onset. So, in Tourette syndrome, the expected age of onset is between the ages of five and seven years old. So, to have kind of acute new abnormal movements as a seventeen-year-old would be very unusual for a new-onset diagnosis of Tourette syndrome. However, there's a couple of things from the history that could help you. One would be, were there ever tics in the past? Because sometimes, when you think retrospectively, a lot of these patients might have had a simple eye-blinking tic or a coughing tic when they were a child. And perhaps they did have Tourette syndrome, a very mild case of it. But because the tics were never that pronounced, they never went to see anyone about it and it was never known that they had Tourette syndrome in the first place. If there is no history like that and the movements are completely new, out of the blue, of course you want to rule out anything acute that could be going on that could be causing that. Looking at the phenomenology of the movements can also be very helpful. When you're looking at abnormal tic movements, you would expect most cases of something like Tourette syndrome to occur first in the midline and go in a rostrocoidal distribution. So, you mostly see things happening with eye blinking, throat clearing, sniffling, neck snapping. These are some of the immediate tics that start to happen. We also usually start to see simple tics, as opposed to complex tics, at the beginning. Now, over the course of time, many patients do develop more complex tics that might involve the arms or the extremities, but that would be unusual to see this as a presenting feature of new-onset Tourette syndrome. Dr Albin: Got it. So, I'm hearing that the history really matters and that sometimes, like those, like, first-onset seizures, I imagine as a neurointensivist, we see a lot of patients who've had seizures who think that they're presenting the first time. And then we go back and we say, well, actually they have had some abnormal movements at night. Sounds like it's very similar with these movement disorders where you have to really go back and ask, well, was there some sniffling? Did they go through a phase where they were grunting frequently? Because I can imagine that many children make those behaviors, and that it may not have registered as something that was cause for concern. Dr Frey: Absolutely. Dr Albin: And then the other thing I heard from you was that the phenomenology really matters and that there is a typical presentation, starting from sort of the face and working the way down. And that can be really helpful. But in this case, the family is quite clear. No, no, no. She's never had movements like this before. This is- nothing like this. We promise you, did not go through a phase where she was coughing or blinking, or, this is all totally new. And the phenomenology, they say, no, no, she did not start with blinking. It definitely started in the arm and then progressed in its complex movements. So, knowing that about her, how does that sort of shape how you move forward with the diagnosis? Dr Frey: Yeah. So, really good question. And this is something that I think really peaked during the Covid-19 pandemic. We saw an influx of patients, especially teenage girls or young adult girls, who basically would come in and have these new, acute-onset, abnormal movements. We weren't sure what to call them initially. There was some discussion of calling them “explosive tic disorder” and things like that. A lot of these actually looked very similar to psychogenic nonepileptic seizures, where they would come into the emergency department and have many abnormal movements that were so severe, that they were having a “tic attack” and couldn't stop the abnormal movements from occurring. And we saw so many of these cases during the Covid-19 pandemic that it eventually became known as a distinctive diagnostic criteria with the name of “functional ticlike behavior”, or FTLB. When we think about functional ticlike behavior, we think that these tics are driven more by anxiety and stress. A lot of times, the backstory of these patients, they were in a very stressful situation, and that's when the abnormal movement started. So, a very similar kind of backstory to patients that might develop psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. These tics were popularized, for lack of a better term, via social media during the Covid-19 pandemic. One article is out there that even has called these functional ticlike behaviors as “a pandemic within a pandemic”, because there was such a strong showing of ticlike behavior in the clinics during the Covid-19 pandemic. Although social media was thought to play a big role in these functional ticlike behaviors, we think that there's probably a little bit more complexity and nuance to why these functional ticlike behaviors develop. There is probably a little bit of a genetic predisposition. There's probably some other psychosocial factors at play. And when we see cases like this, the best thing that you can do is educate your patients about the differences between functional ticlike behaviors and tics that we see associated with conditions like Tourette syndrome. And then the best types of treatments that we have seen thus far are treating any underlying stressors, if any of those exist, as well as cognitive behavioral therapy has been shown to be somewhat helpful. As the Covid-19 pandemic has wound down, we have actually seen a lot less cases in our clinic. And one reason we think is less stressors, less uncertainty for the future, which we think was a driving precipitant of some of these cases. But it also is not as popularized in the media as well. There were a lot of TikTok users in particular, which lent itself to the name “TikTok tic”. These videos are not as viewed or not as popular as they were during the Covid-19 pandemic. One reason being that because we are not all relegated to our homes, constantly looking to online sources of information---just in general, we have kind of not been on the Internet as much as we were during the Covid-19 pandemic---as a society as a whole. Dr Albin: This is really fascinating how the environmental milieu, for lack of a better word, like, really influenced how patients were experiencing, sort of, functional neurologic disorders. In your article you describe really these three baskets of primary tic---which can then be a part of Tourette syndrome---,functional ticlike behaviors---which really were a unique manifestation of stress and anxiety specifically during the Covid-19 pandemic---, and then tics as a manifestation of some either different underlying etiology or medication side effect. So, when do you get concerned about that secondary etiology? Dr Frey: So secondary tics can occur in a variety of instances. I think some of the more common examples would be in genetic disorders. So, Huntington's disease is a really good example. I think we all associate chorea with Huntington's disease. That's probably the most commonly associated phenomenology that we see with Huntington's disease. But we can see a variety of movement disorders in Huntington's, and one of them is tics. So, when we see tics in association with other types of movement disorders, we should be thinking about a possible genetic etiology. If we see tics in association with other neurologic symptoms, such as seizures or cognitive changes, we should be thinking that this is something besides a primary tic disorder. You also mentioned medication use, and it's really important to think about tardive tics. I know we often think about tardive dyskinesia, and the first kind of phenomenology that jumps into our brain is usually chorea because it's those abnormal lip movements, finger movements, toe movements that we see after a patient has been on, for example, an antipsychotic or an antiemetic that has antidopaminergic properties. However, we can see a variety of abnormal movement disorders that occur secondary to antidopaminergic medications, especially after abrupt withdrawal of these antidopaminergic medications. And tics are one of them. There have been cases reported where people that have tardive tics will still report that they have a premonitory urge, as well as a sense of relief after their tics. So, it actually can seem very similar to Tourette syndrome and the tics that people with Tourette syndrome experience on a regular basis. The key here is that the treatment might differ because if it's due to an antidopaminergic medication or abrupt withdrawal of that antidopaminergic medication, you might need to treat it a little bit differently than you would otherwise. Dr Albin: I love that you bring in, it's not just looking at their specific movement disorder that they may be coming to clinic with, that tic disorder, but are there other movement disorders? Has there been a change in their medication history? Have they had cognitive changes? So really emphasizing the importance of that complete and comprehensive neurologic history, neurologic physical exam, to really get the complete picture so that it's not honing in on, oh, this is a primary tic. That's all there is to it, because it could be so much more. I know we're getting close to sort of the end of our time together, but I really wanted to switch to end on talking about treatment. And your article does such a beautiful job of talking about behavioral interventions and really exciting new medical interventions. But I would like to, if you don't mind, have you focus on, what behavioral counseling and what education do you provide for patients and their families? Because I imagine that the neurologist plays a really important role in educating the patient and their family about these disorders. Dr Frey: Absolutely. When we think about treatment, one of the most important things you can do for patients with Tourette syndrome or other primary tic disorders is educate them. This remains true whether it's a primary tic disorder that we see in Tourette syndrome or the functional ticlike behavior that we've discussed here. A lot of times, because there is such a stigma against people with tic disorders and Tourette syndrome, when they hear that they have Tourette syndrome or they are diagnosed with that, sometimes that can be an upsetting diagnosis. And sometimes you have to take time explaining what exactly that means and debunking a lot of the myths that go along with the stigmas associated with Tourette syndrome. I think a lot of times people are under the false assumption that people with Tourette syndrome cannot lead normal lives and cannot hold down jobs and cannot be productive members of society. None of that is true. Most of my patients have great lives, good quality of life, and are able to go about their day-to-day life without any major issues. And one of the reasons for that is we do have a lot of great treatment options available. Another important stigma to break down is that people with tic disorders are doing this for attention or doing this because they are trying to get something from someone else. That is absolutely false. We do think that the tics themselves are semivolitional because people with Tourette syndrome have some degree of...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431755
info_outline
Ataxia With Dr. Theresa Zesiewicz
09/10/2025
Ataxia With Dr. Theresa Zesiewicz
Ataxia is a neurologic symptom that refers to incoordination of voluntary movement, typically causing gait dysfunction and imbalance. Genetic testing and counseling can be used to identify the type of ataxia and to assess the risk for unaffected family members. In this episode, Katie Grouse, MD, FAAN, speaks with Theresa A. Zesiewicz, MD, FAAN, author of the article “Ataxia” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Grouse is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a clinical assistant professor at the University of California San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Dr. Zesiewicz is a professor of neurology and director at the University of South Florida Ataxia Research Center, and the medical director at the University of South Florida Movement Disorders Neuromodulation Center at the University of South Florida and at the James A. Haley Veteran’s Hospital in Tampa, Florida. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Grouse: This is Dr Katie Grouse. Today I'm interviewing Dr Theresa Zesiewicz about her article on ataxia, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Zesiewicz: Well, thank you, Dr Grouse. I'm Dr Theresa Zesiewicz, otherwise known as Dr Z, and I'm happy to be here. Dr Grouse: I have to say, I really enjoyed reading your article. It was a really great refresher for myself as a general neurologist on the topic of ataxia and a really great reminder on a great framework to approach diagnosis and management. But I wanted to start off by asking what you feel is the key message that you hope our listeners will take away from reading your article. Dr Zesiewicz: Yes, so, thanks. I think one of the key messages is that there has been an explosion and renaissance of genetic testing in the past 10 years that has really revolutionized the field of ataxia and has made diagnosis easier for us, more manageable, and hopefully will lead to treatments in the future. So, I think that's a major step forward for our field in terms of genetic techniques over the last 10 years, and even over the last 30 years. There's just been so many diseases that have been identified genetically. So, I think that's a really important take-home message. The other take-home message is that the first drug to treat Friedreich's ataxia, called omaveloxolone, came about about two years ago. This was also a really landmark discovery. As you know, a lot of these ataxias are very difficult to treat. Dr Grouse: Now pivoting back to thinking about the approach to diagnosis of ataxia, how does the timeline of the onset of ataxia symptoms inform your approach? Dr Zesiewicz: The timeline is important because ataxia can be acute, subacute or chronic in nature. And the timeline is important because, if it's acute, it may mean that the ataxia took place over seconds to hours. This may mean a toxic problem or a hypoxic problem. Whereas a chronic ataxia can occur over many years, and that can inform more of a neurodegenerative or more of a genetic etiology. So, taking a very detailed history on the patient is very important. Sometimes I ask them, what is the last time you remember that you walked normal? And that can be a wedding, that can be a graduation. Just some timeline, some point, that the patient actually walked correctly before they remember having to hold onto a railing or taking extra steps to make sure that they didn't fall down, that they didn't have imbalance. That sometimes that's a good way to ask the patient when is the last time they had a problem. And they can help you to try to figure out how long these symptoms have been going on. Dr Grouse: I really appreciate that advice. I will say that I agree, it can sometimes be really hard to get patients to really think back to when they really started to notice something was different. So, I like the idea of referencing back to a big event that may be more memorable to them. Now, given that framework of, you know, thinking through the timeline, could you walk us through your approach to the evaluation of a patient who presents to your clinic with that balance difficulties once you've established that? Dr Zesiewicz: Sure. So, the first thing is to determine whether the patient truly has ataxia. So, do they have imbalance? Do they have a wide base gait? That's very important because patients come in frequently to your clinic and they'll have balance problems, but they can have knee issues or hip issues, neuropathy, something like that. And sometimes what we say to the residents and the students is, usually ataxia or cerebellar symptoms go together with other problems, like ocular problems are really common in cerebellar syndromes. Or dysmetria, pass pointing, speech disorder like dysarthria. So, not only do you need to look at the gait, but you should look at the other symptoms surrounding the gait to see if you think that the patient actually has a cerebellar syndrome. Or do they have something like a vestibular ataxia which would have more vertigo? Or do they have a sensory ataxia, which would occur if a person closes his eyes or has more ataxia when he or she is in the dark? So, you have to think about what you're looking at is the cerebellar syndrome. And then once we look to see if the patient truly has a cerebellar syndrome, then we look at the age, we look at---as you said before, the timeline. Is this acute, subacute, or chronic? And usually I think of ataxia as falling into three categories. It's either acquired, it's either hereditary, or it's neurodegenerative. It can be hereditary. And if it's not hereditary, is it acquired, or is it something like a multiple system atrophy or a parkinsonism or something like that? So, we try to put that together and start to narrow down on the diagnosis, thinking about those parameters. Dr Grouse: That's really a helpful way to think through it. And it is true, it can get very complex when patients come in with balance difficulties. There's so many things you need to think about, but that is a great way to think about it. Of course, we know that most people who come in to the Movements Disorders clinic are getting MRI scans of their brains. But I'm curious, in which cases of patients with cerebellar ataxia do you find the MRI to be particularly helpful in the diagnosis? Dr Zesiewicz: So, an MRI can be very important. Not always, but- so, something like multiple system atrophy type C where you may see a hot cross bun sign or a pontine hyperintensity on the T2-weighted image, that would be helpful. But of course, that doesn't make the diagnosis. It's something that may help you with the diagnosis. In FXTAS, which is fragile X tremor/ataxia syndrome, the patient may have the middle cerebellar peduncle sign or the symmetric hyperintensity in the middle cerebellar peduncles, which is often visible but not always. Something like Wernicke’s, where you see an abnormality of the mammillary bodies. Wilson's disease, which is quite rare, T2-weighted image may show hyperintensities in the putamen in something like Wilson's disease. Those are the main MRI abnormalities, I think, with ataxia. And then we look at the cerebellum itself. I mean, that seems self-evident, but if you look at a sagittal section of the MRI and you see just a really significant atrophy of the cerebellum, that's going to help you determine whether you really have a cerebellar syndrome. Dr Grouse: That's really encouraging to hear a good message for all of us who sometimes feel like maybe we're missing something. It's good to know that information can always come up down the line to make things more clear. Your article does a great review of spinal cerebellar ataxia, but I found it interesting learning about the more recently described syndrome of SCA 27B. Would you mind telling us more about that and other really common forms of SCA that's good to keep in mind? Dr Zesiewicz: Sure. So, there are now 49 types of spinal cerebellar ataxia that have been identified. The most common are the polyglutamine repeat diseases: so, spinocerebellar ataxia type 3 or type 2, type 6, are probably the most common. One of the most recent spinocerebellar ataxias to be genetically identified and clinically identified is spinocerebellar ataxia 27B. This is caused by a GAA expansion repeat in the first intron of the fibroblast growth factor on chromosome 13. And the symptoms do include ataxia, eye problems, downbeat nystagmus, other nystagmus, vertical, and diplopia. It appears to be a more common form of adult-onset ataxia, and probably more common than was originally thought. It may account for a substantial number of ataxias, like, a substantial percentage of ataxias that we didn't know about. So, this was really a amazing discovery on SCA 27B. Dr Grouse: Now a lot of us I think feel a little anxious when we think about genetic testing for ataxia simply because there's so many forms, things are changing quickly. Do you have a rule of thumb or a kind of a framework that we can think of as we approach how we should be thinking about getting genetic testing for the subset of patients? Dr Zesiewicz: Sure. And I think that this is where age comes into play a lot. So, if you have a child who's 10, 11, or 12 who's having balance problems in the schoolyard, does not have a history of ataxia in the family, the teachers are telling you that the child is not running correctly, they're having problems with physical education, that is someone who you would think about testing for Friedreich’s ataxia. A preteen or a child, that would be one thing that would be important to test. When you talk to your patient, it's important to really take a detailed family history. Not just mom or dad, but ethnicity, grandparents, etc. And sometimes, once in a while, you come up with a known spinal cerebellar ataxia. Then you can just test for that. So, if a person is from Portugal or has Portugal background and they have ataxia and the parents had ataxia, you would think of spinal cerebellar ataxia type 3. Or if they're Brazilian, or if the person is from a certain area of Cuba and mom and dad had ataxia and that person has ataxia, you would think of spinal cerebellar ataxia type 2. Or if a person has ataxia and their parent had blindness or visual problems, you may be more likely to think of spinal cerebellar ataxia type 7, for example. If they have that---either they have a known genetic cause in in the family, first degree family, or they come from an area of the world in which we can pinpoint what type we think it is---you can go ahead and get those tests. If not, you can take an ataxia comprehensive panel. Many times now, if you take the panel and the panel is negative, it will reflex to the whole exome gene sequencing, where we're finding really unusual and more rare types of ataxia, which are very interesting. Spinal cerebellar ataxia type 32, spinal cerebellar ataxia type 36, I had a spinal cerebellar ataxia type 15. So, I think you should start with the age, then the family history, then where the person is from. And then, if none of those work out, you can get a comprehensive panel, and then go on to whole exome gene sequencing. Dr Grouse: That's really, really useful. Thank you so much for breaking that down in a really simple way that a lot of us can take with us. Pivoting a little bit now back towards different types of acquired ataxias, what are some typical lab tests that you recommend for that type of workup? Dr Zesiewicz: Again, if there's no genetic history and the person does not appear to have a neurodegenerative disease, we do test for acquired ataxias. Acquired ataxias can be complex. Many times, they are in the autoimmune family. So, what we start with are just basic labs like a CBC or a CMP, but then we tried to look at some of the other abnormalities that could cause ataxia. So, celiac disease, stiff person syndrome. So, you would look at anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies, Hashimoto's---so, antithyroglobulin antibodies or antithyroperoxidase antibodies would be helpful. You know, in a case of where the patients may have an underlying neoplasm, maybe even a paraneoplastic workup, such as an anti-Hu, anti-Yo, anti-Ri. A person has breast cancer, for example, you may want to take a paraneoplastic panel. I've been getting more of the anti-autoimmune encephalitis panels in some cases, that were- that are very interesting. And then, you know, things that sometimes we forget now like the syphilis test, thyroid-stimulating test, take a B12 and folate, for example. That would be important. Those are some of the labs. We just have on our electronic chart a group of acquired labs for ataxia. If we can't find any other reason, we just go ahead and try to get those. Dr Grouse: Now, I'm curious what you think is the most challenging aspect of diagnosing a patient with cerebellar ataxia? Dr Zesiewicz: So, for those of us who see many of these patients a day, some of the hardest patients are the ones that---regardless of the workup that we do, we've narrowed it down, it's not hereditary. You know, they've been through the whole exome gene sequencing and we've done the acquired ataxia workup. It doesn't appear to be that. And then we've looked for parkinsonism and neurodegenerative diseases, and it doesn't appear to be that either; like, the alpha-synuclein will be negative. Those are the toughest patients, where we think we've done everything and we still don't have the answer. So, I've had patients in whom I've taken care of family members years and years ago, they had a presumed diagnosis, and later on I've seen their children or other family members. And with the advent of the genetic tests that we have, like whole exome gene sequencing, we have now been able to give the patient and the family a definitive diagnosis that they didn't have 25 years ago. So, I would say don't give up hope. Retesting is important, and as science continues and we get more information and we make more landmark discoveries in genetics, you may be better able to diagnose the patient. Dr Grouse: I was wondering if you had any recommendations regarding either some tips and tricks, some pearls of wisdom you can impart to us regarding the work of ataxia, or conversely, any big pitfalls that you can help us avoid? I would love to hear about it. Dr Zesiewicz: Yeah, there's no easy way to treat or diagnose ataxia patients. I've always felt that the more patients you see- and sounds easy, but the more patients you see, the better you're going to become at it, and eventually things are going to fall into place. You'll begin to see similarities in patients, etc. I think it's important not only to make sure that a person has ataxia, but again, look at the other signs and symptoms that may point to ataxia that you'll see in a cerebellar syndrome. I think it's important to do a full neuroexam. If a person has spasticity, that may point you more towards a certain type of ataxia than if a person has no reflexes, for example, that we see in Friedreich's ataxia. Some of the ocular findings are very interesting as well. It's important to know if a person has a tremor. I've seen several Wilson's disease cases in my life with ataxia. They're very important. I think a full neuroexam and also a very detailed history would be very helpful. Dr Grouse: Tell us about some promising developments in the diagnosis and management of ataxia that we should be on the lookout for. Dr Zesiewicz: The first drug for Friedreich's ataxia was FDA-approved two years ago, which was an NRF2 activator, which was extremely exciting and promising. There are also several medications that are now in front of the FDA that may also be very promising and have gone through long clinical trials. There's a medication that's related to riluzole, which is a medication used for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, that has been through about seven years of testing. That is before the FDA as well for spinal cerebellar ataxia. Friedreich's ataxia has now completed the first cardiac gene therapy program with AAV vectors, which- we're waiting for full results, but that's a cardiac test. But I would assume that in the future, neurological gene therapy is not far behind if we've already done cardiac gene therapy and Friedreich's ataxia. So, you know, some of these AAV vector-based genetic therapies may be very helpful, as well as ASO, antisense oligonucleotides, for example. And I think in the future, other things to think about are the CRISPR/Cas9 technology for potential treatment of ataxia. It is a very exciting time, and some major promising therapies have been realized in the past 2 to 3 years. Dr Grouse: Well, that's really exciting, and we'll all look forward to seeing these becoming more clinically applicable in the future. So, thank you so much for coming to talk with us today. Dr Zesiewicz: Thank you. Dr Grouse: Again, today I've been interviewing Dr Theresa Zesiewicz about her article on ataxia, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431720
info_outline
Huntington Disease and Chorea with Dr. Kathryn Moore
09/03/2025
Huntington Disease and Chorea with Dr. Kathryn Moore
Chorea describes involuntary movements that are random, abrupt, and unpredictable, flowing from one body part to another. The most common cause of genetic chorea in adults is Huntington disease, which requires comprehensive, multidisciplinary care as well as support for care partners, who may themselves be diagnosed with the disease. In this episode, Aaron Berkowitz, MD, PhD FAAN speaks with Kathryn P. L. Moore, MD, MSc, author of the article “Huntington Disease and Chorea” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Berkowitz is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a professor of neurology at the University of California San Francisco in the Department of Neurology in San Francisco, California. Dr. Moore is an assistant professor and director of the Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders Fellowship in the department of neurology at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Berkowitz: This is Dr Aaron Berkowitz with Continuum Audio, and today I'm interviewing Dr Kathryn Moore about her article on diagnosis and management of Huntington disease and chorea, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Welcome to the podcast, Dr Moore. Could you please introduce yourself to our audience? Dr Moore: Yeah, thank you so much. I'm so excited to be here. I'm Dr Moore. I'm an assistant professor of neurology at Duke University, where I work as a movement disorder specialist. I run our fellowship there and help with our residency program as well. So, I'm excited to speak with our listeners about chorea today. Dr Berkowitz: Fantastic. And we're excited to talk to you about chorea. So, as a general neurologist myself, I only see chorea pretty rarely compared to other movement disorders like tremor, myoclonus, maybe the occasional tic disorder. And like anything I don't see very often, I always have to look up the differential diagnosis and how to evaluate a patient with chorea. So, I was so glad to read your article. And next time I see a patient with chorea, I know I'll be referring to your article as a great reference to have a framework for how to approach it. I hope our readers will look at all these helpful tables on differential diagnosis based on distribution of chorea in the body, potential etiologies, time course of onset and evolution, associated drug-induced causes, what tests to send. So, I highly recommend our listeners read the article. Keep those tables handy for when a patient comes in with chorea. I'm excited to pick your brain about some of these topics today. First, how do you go about distinguishing chorea from other hyperkinetic movement disorders when you see a patient that you think might have chorea? Dr Moore: One of the wonderful things about being a movement disorder specialist is we spend a lot of time looking at movements and training our brain to make these distinctions. The things that I would be looking out for chorea is involuntary, uncontrolled movements that appear to be brief and flowing from one part of the body to another. So, if you can watch a patient and predict what movements they're going to do, this probably isn't chorea. And it should be flowing from one part of the body to another. So, not staying just in one part of the body or having sustained movements. It can be difficult to distinguish between a tic or dystonia or myoclonus. Those things tend to be more predictable and repetitive than the chorea, which tends to be really random and can look like dancing. Dr Berkowitz: That's very helpful. So, once you've decided the patient has chorea, what's your framework for thinking about the differential diagnosis of the cause of the patient's chorea? Dr Moore: Well, that could be really challenging. The differential for chorea is very broad, and so the two things that I tend to use are age of the patient and acuity of onset. And so, if you're thinking about acute onset of chorea, you're really looking at a structural lesion like a stroke or a systemic issue like infection, hyperglycemia, etc. Where a gradually progressive chorea tends to be genetic in nature. When you're thinking about the difference between a child and an adult, the most common cause of chorea in a child is Sydenham's chorea. And actually, the most common cause of chorea that I tend to see is Parkinson's disease medication. So, if anybody's seen dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease, you've seen chorea. But it's those two things that I'm using, the age of the patient and the acuity. Somewhere in the middle, though---so, if you have subacute onset of chorea---it's important to remember to think about autoimmune conditions or paraneoplastic conditions because these are treatable. Dr Berkowitz: That's very helpful. So, like in any chief concern in neurology, we're using the context like the age and then the time course. And then a number of other helpful points in your article about the distribution of chorea in the body. Any comments you'd like to make about- we have this very helpful table that I thought was very interesting. So, you really get deep into the nuances of chorea and the movement disorder specialist expert level. Are there any aspects of parts of the body affected by chorea or distribution of chorea across the body that help you hone your differential diagnosis? Dr Moore: Certainly. I think where the chorea is located in the body can be helpful, but not as helpful as other conditions where you're localizing a lesion or that sort of thing. Because you can have a systemic cause of chorea that causes a hemichorea; that you can have hyperglycemia causing a hemichorea, or even Sydenham's chorea being a hemichorea. But things that we think about, if the forehead is involved, I would think about Huntington’s disease, although this is not pathognomonic. And if it's involving the face or the mouth, you can think about neuroacanthocytosis or, more commonly, tardive dyskinesia. Hemichorea would make me think about some of those systemic issues like hyperglycemia, Sydenham's chorea, those sorts of things, but I would rely more on the historical context and the acuity of presentation than the distribution itself. Dr Berkowitz: Got it. That's very helpful. So those can be helpful features, but not sort of specific for any particular condition. Dr Moore: Exactly. Dr Berkowitz: Yeah, I often see forehead chorea mentioned as sort of specific to Huntington's disease. Since I don't see much Huntington's disease myself, what does forehead chorea look like? What is the forehead doing? How do you recognize that there is chorea of the forehead? It's just sort of hard for me to imagine what it would look like. Dr Moore: It's really tricky. I think seeing the eyebrows go up and down or the brows furrow in an unpredictable way is really what we're looking for. And that can be hard if you're having a conversation. My forehead is certainly animated as we're talking about one of my favorite topics here. One of the tricks that I use with the fellows is to observe the forehead from the side, and there you can see the undulation of the forehead muscles. And that can be helpful as you're looking for these things. I think where it's most helpful to use the forehead is if you're trying to determine if someone with a psychiatric history has tardive dyskinesia or Huntington's disease, because there can be quite a lot of overlap there. And unfortunately, patients can have both conditions. And so, using the forehead movement can be helpful to maybe direct further testing for Huntington's disease. Dr Berkowitz: Oh, wow, that's a very helpful pearl. So, if you see, sort of, diffuse chorea throughout the body and the forehead is involved, to my understanding it may be less specific. But in the context of wondering, is the neuropsychiatric condition and movement disorder related by an underlying cause in the case of seeing orofacial dyskinesias, is the relationship a drug having caused a tardive dyskinesia or is the whole underlying process Huntington's, the absence of forehead might push you a little more towards tardive dyskinesia, presuming there is an appropriate implicated drug and the presence of forehead chorea would really clue you in more to Huntington's. Did I understand that pearl? Dr Moore: That's exactly right, and I'm glad you brought up the point about making sure, if you're considering tardive dyskinesia, that there has been an appropriate drug exposure. Because without that you can't make that diagnosis. Dr Berkowitz: That's a very helpful and interesting pearl, looking at the forehead from the side. That is a movement disorders pearl for sure. Sort of not just looking at the forehead from one angle and trying to figure out what it's doing, but going to look at the patient in profile and trying to sort it out. I love that. Okay. So, based on the differential diagnosis you would have crafted based on whether this is sort of acute, subacute, chronic, the age of the patient, whether it's unilateral, bilateral, which parts of the body. How do you go about the initial evaluation in terms of laboratory testing, imaging, etc.? Dr Moore: Well, certainly in an acute-onset patient, you're going to get a number of labs---and that's listed out for you in the paper---and consider imaging as well, looking for an infarct. One thing our learners will know is that sort of the typical answer to what's the infarct causing hemichorea would be the subthalamic nucleus. But really, those infarcts can be almost anywhere. There are case reports for infarcts in a wide variety of places in the brain leading to hemichorea. So, I think some general blood work and an MRI of the brain is a good place to start. For someone who has a more chronic course of the development of chorea, there are certain labs that I would get---and an MRI, because if you get an MRI and there's heavy metal deposition or other disease, structurally, that indicates a certain condition, that can help you pretty considerably. But otherwise, I'm looking for inflammatory markers, heavy metals, HIV, some general other things that are outlined, to help make sure that I'm not missing something that's treatable before I go down the route of genetic testing. And we may talk about this in a little bit, but if you start out with genetic testing and then you sort of have to back up and do more systemic testing, that can be very disjointed when it comes to good patient care. Dr Berkowitz: That's very helpful. So yeah, if it's acute, obviously this is the most straightforward scenario, acute and unilateral. We're imagining something lesional, as you said, either a stroke or---not sort of sudden, but fast, but not sudden---you might think of another structural lesion. Toxoplasmosis, right, has an affinity for the basal ganglia if you were seeing this in a patient who is immunocompromised. But in a case that, probably as you alluded to, sort of what we would see most commonly in practice, those still relatively rare, sort of subacute to chronic symmetric chorea. There's a long list of tests that are recommended. In your article and in other texts, I've read lupus testing, anti-phospholipid antibodies… but the list is long. I’ll refer readers to your article. Out of curiosity as a specialist, how often do you see any of these labs come back revealing any underlying diagnosis in a patient who's otherwise healthy and just has developed chorea and comes to you with that chief concern? I feel like I've sent that mega-workup a few times; I'm obviously a general neurologist, but not nearly as many times as you have been. It's- I can't remember a time where something has come up, maybe an ANA one to forty or something like this that we don't think is relevant. But in your practice, how often do you end up finding a reversible cause in the laboratory testing versus ending up starting to go down the genetic testing route, which we'll talk about in a moment? Dr Moore: It's not common, but it is important that we capture these things. Because for a lot of those laboratory tests, there are treatments that are available, or other health implications if those come back positive. So, the case I think of is a polycythemia vera patient who had diffused subacute onset chorea and was able to be treated, was temporarily managed with medication for her chorea, and as her PV improved, she was able to come off those medications. As I was alluding to before---and I'm sure we'll talk about genetic testing---if you test for HD and it's negative, do you go down the route of additional expensive genetic testing, or do you then circle back and go, oops, I missed this treatable condition? As we talk about genetic testing as well, getting HD testing is a pretty involved process. And so, we want to make sure we are checking all those boxes before we move forward. So, it's not common, but we do catch some treatable conditions, and that's really important not to miss. Dr Berkowitz: That's very interesting. So, you diagnosed that polycythemia vera by blood smear, is that how you make the diagnosis? Dr Moore: Yes. Dr Berkowitz: And is that a once-in-a-career-so-far type of thing, or does that happen time to time? Dr Moore: For me, that's a once-so-far, but I don't doubt that I'll see it again. Dr Berkowitz: Great. And how about lupus and some of these other things we look for in the absence of other systemic features? Have you picked up any of these or heard of colleagues picking up something on laboratory testing? They said, oh, this patient came in for a referral for genetic testing, negative Huntington's disease. And good news, we found polycythemia vera; good news, we found undiagnosed lupus and we reversed it. I'm just curious, epidemiologically, seeing these long lists and not having the subspecialty practice that you do, how often you find a reversible cause like we do for neuropathy all the time, right? Oh, it's diabetes, it's B12---maybe not reversible, but preventing progression---or reversible dementia work up. You get so excited when you find low B12 and you replete the patient's B12, and they get better when they had been concerned they were developing an irreversible condition. How often does one in your subspecialty find a reversible cause on that initial mega-lab screen? Dr Moore: I think it's really uncommon, and maybe the folks that do are caught by someone else that never make it to Huntington's clinic, but I don't tend to see those cases. There are, of course, case reports and well-described in the literature about lupus and movement disorders and things of that nature, but that doesn't come to our clinic on a regular basis for sure. Dr Berkowitz: Got it. That's helpful to hear. Well, we've alluded to genetic testing a number of times now, so let's go ahead and talk about it. A lot of your article focuses on Huntington disease, and I was thinking about---in the course of our medical training in medical school, and then neurology residency, for those of us who don't become movement disorder experts like yourself---we learn a lot about Huntington disease. That's sort of the disease that causes chorea, until we later learned there are a whole number of diseases, not just the reversible causes we've been talking about, but a number of genetic diseases which you expertly reviewing your article. So, what are some of the red flags that suggest to you that a patient with chronically progressive chorea---and whom you're concerned for Huntington's or another genetic cause---what are some things you notice about the history, about the exam, the symptoms, the signs, the syndrome, that suggest to you that, actually, this one looks like it might not turn out to be HD. I think this patient might have something else. And as you have alluded to, how do you approach this? Do you send HD testing, wait for it to come back, and then go forward? Are there genetic panels for certain genetic causes of chorea? Do you skip just a whole exome sequencing, or will you miss some of the trinucleotide repeat conditions? How do you approach this in practice? Dr Moore: I'll try to tackle all that. One thing I will say is that a lot of patients with chorea, regardless of the cause, can look very similar to one another. So, if you're looking at chronic onset chorea, perhaps with some neuropsychiatric features, I'm going to most often think about HD because that's the most common cause. Certainly, as we mentioned before, if there's a lot of tongue protrusion, I would think about the acanthocytic conditions, neurocanthocytosis and McCloud syndrome. But generally in those conditions, we're looking at HD as the most likely cause. Certainly, if there is epilepsy or some other syndromic types of things going on, I may think more broadly. But it's important to know that while HD, as you mentioned, is the cause of chorea, many of our patients will have parkinsonism, tics, dystonia, a whole host of other movement phenomenologies. So, that wouldn't dissuade me from thinking about HD. When we think about the kind of patients that you're describing, upwards of 95% of those people will have Huntington's disease. And the process for genetic testing is fairly involved. The Huntington's Disease Society of America has organized a set of recommendations for providers to go about the process of genetic testing in a safe and supportive way for patients and their families. And so that's referred to in the article because it really is important and was devised by patients and families that are affected by this disease. And so, when we're thinking about genetic testing for HD, if I reveal that you have HD, this potentially affects your children and your parents and your siblings. You can have a lot of implications for the lives and health and finances of your family members. We also know that there is high suicidality in patients with HD, in patients who are at risk for HD; and there's even a higher risk of suicidality in patients who are at risk but test negative for HD. So, we do recommend a supportive environment for these patients and their families. And so, for presymptomatic patients or patients who are at risk and don't have chorea, this involves making sure we have, sort of, our ducks in a row, as it were, when we think about life insurance, and, do you have somebody supportive to be with you through this journey of genetic testing, no matter what the results are? So, oftentimes I'll say to folks, you know, there's this 20-page policy that I encourage you to look at, but there are Huntington's Disease Centers of Excellence across the country that are happy to help you with that process, to make sure that the patients are well supported. This is an individual genetic test because, as you mentioned, it is a CAG repeat disorder. And unfortunately, there is no chorea panel. So, if an HD test comes back negative, what we'll do then is think about what's called the HD phenocopies. As I mentioned before, some of these patients who look like they have HD will have a negative HD test. And so, what do you do then? Well, there's a handful of phenocopies---so, other genetic mutations that cause a very similar presentation. And so, we try to be smart, since there's not a panel, we try to be smart about how we choose which test to do next. So, for instance, there's a condition called DRPLA that is present in an African-American family...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431645
info_outline
Progressive Supranuclear Palsy and Corticobasal Syndrome With Dr. Nikolaus McFarland
08/27/2025
Progressive Supranuclear Palsy and Corticobasal Syndrome With Dr. Nikolaus McFarland
Progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal syndrome are closely related neurodegenerative disorders that present with progressive parkinsonism and multiple other features that overlap clinically and neuropathologically. Early recognition is critical to provide appropriate treatment and supportive care. In this episode, Teshamae Monteith, MD, FAAN speaks with Nikolaus R. McFarland, MD, PhD, FAAN, author of the article “Progressive Supranuclear Palsy and Corticobasal Syndrome” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Monteith is the associate editor of Continuum® Audio and an associate professor of clinical neurology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine in Miami, Florida. Dr. McFarland is an associate professor of neurology at the University of Florida College of Medicine at the Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases in Gainesville, Florida. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Monteith: Hi, this is Dr Teshamae Monteith. Today I'm interviewing Dr Nikolaus McFarland about his article on progressive supranuclear palsy and cortical basilar syndrome, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Welcome, how are you? Dr Farland: I'm great. Thank you for inviting me to do this. This is a great opportunity. I had fun putting this article together, and it’s part of my passion. Dr Monteith: Yes, I know that. You sit on the board with me in the Florida Society of Neurology and I've seen your lectures. You're very passionate about this. And so why don't you first start off with introducing yourself, and then tell us just a little bit about what got you interested in this field. Dr Farland: I'm Dr Nicholas McFarlane. I'm an associate professor at the University of Florida, and I work at the Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases. I am a director of a number of different centers. So, I actually direct the cure PSP Center of Care and the MSA Center of Excellence at the University of Florida; I also direct the Huntington's clinic there as well. But for many years my focus has been on atypical parkinsonisms. And, you know, I've treated these patients for years, and one of my focuses is actually these patients who suffer from progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal syndrome. So that's kind of what this review is all about. Dr Monteith: You probably were born excited, but I want to know what got you interested in this in particular? Dr Farland: So, what got me interested in this in particular was really the disease and the challenges that's involved in it. So, Parkinson's disease is pretty common, and we see a lot of that in our clinic. Yet many times, roughly about 10 to 15% of my patients present with these atypical disorders. And they're quite fascinating. They present in different ways. They're fairly uncommon. They're complex disorders that progress fairly rapidly, and they have multiple different features. They're sort of exciting to see clinically as a neurologist. I think they're really interesting from an academic standpoint, but also in the standpoint of really trying to bring together sort of a team. We have built a multidisciplinary team here at the University of Florida to take care of these patients. They require a number of folks on that team to take care of them. And so, what's exciting, really, is the challenge of treating these patients. There are very limited numbers of therapies that are available, and the current therapies that we have often really aren't great and over time they fail. And so, part of the challenge is actually doing research. And so, there's actually a lot of new research that's been going on in this field. Recently, there's been some revisions to the clinical criteria to help diagnose these disorders. So, that's really what's exciting. The field is really moving forward fairly rapidly with a number of new diagnostics, therapeutics coming out. And hopefully we can make a real difference for these patients. And so that's what really got me into this field, the challenge of trying to treat these patients, help them, advocate for them and make them better. Dr Monteith: And so, tell me what the essential points of this article. Dr Farland: So, the essential points, really, of this article is: number one, you know, just to recognize the new clinical criteria for both PSP and corticobasal syndrome, the diagnosis for these disorders or the phenotypic spectrum has really expanded over the years. So, we now recognize many different phenotypes of these disorders, and the diagnosis has gotten fairly complicated. And so, one of the goals of this article was to review those new diagnostic criteria and the different phenotypic ways these diseases present. I wanted to discuss, also, some of the neuropathology and clinicopathological overlap that's occurred in these diseases as well as some of the new diagnostic tests that are available. That's definitely growing. Some of the new studies that are out, in terms of research and clinical trials. And then wanted to review some of the approaches for treatment for neurologists. Particularly, we're hoping that, you know, this article educates folks. If you're a general neurologist, we're hoping that recognizing these diseases early on will prompt you to refer these patients to specialty clinics or movement disorder specialists early on so they can get appropriate care, confirm your diagnosis, as well as get them involved in trials if they are available. Dr Monteith: And how has the clinical criteria for PSP and cortical basilar syndrome changed? Dr Farland: I think I already mentioned there's been an evolution of the clinical criteria for PSP. There's new diagnostic criteria that were recently published, and it recognizes the multiple clinical phenotypes and the spectrum of the disease that's out there, which is much broader than we thought about. Corticobasal clinical criteria are the Dr Armstrong criteria from 2013. They have not been updated, but they are in the works of being updated. But it does recognize the classic presentation of corticobasal syndrome, plus a frontal executive predominant and then a variant that actually overlaps with PSP. So, there's a lot more overlap in these two diseases than we originally recognized. Dr Monteith: And so, you spoke a bit about FTD spectrum. So why don't you tell us a little bit about what that is? I know you mentioned multiple phenotypes. Dr Farland: What I really want to say is that both PSP and corticobasal syndrome, they're relatively rare, and what- sort of as to common features, they both are progressive Parkinson disorders, but they have variable features. While they're commonly associated with Parkinson's, they also fit within this frontotemporal lobar spectrum, having features that overlap both clinically and neuropathologically. I just want folks to understand that overlap. One of this pathological overlap here is the predominant Tau pathology in the brain, an increasing recognology- recognition of sort of the pathological heterogeneity within these disorders. So, there's an initial description, a classic of PSP, as Richardson syndrome. But now we recognize there are lots of different features to it and there are different ways it presents, and there's definitely a lot of clinical pathological overlap. Dr Monteith: Why don't we just talk about some red flags for PSP? Dr Farland: Yeah, sure. So, some of the red flags for PSP and even corticobasal syndrome are: number one is rapid progression with early onset of falls, gait difficulty, falling typically backwards, early speech and swallow problems that are more prominent than you see in Parkinson's disease, as well as eye gaze issues. So, ocular motor features, particularly vertical gaze palsy. In particular what we talk about is the supranuclear gaze palsy, and one of the most sensitive features that we've seen with these is downgaze limitation or slowed downgaze, and eventually a full vertical gaze palsy and followed supranuclear gaze palsy. So, there's some of the red flags that we see. So, while we think about the lack of response to levodopa frequently as something that's a red flag for Parkinson's, there are many times that we see Parkinson's patients, and about a quarter of them don't really respond. There's some features that don't respond to levodopa that may not be so specific, but also can be helpful in this disease. Dr Monteith: And what about the red flags for cortical basilar syndrome? Dr Farland: So, for cortical basilar syndrome, some of the red flags again are this rapidly depressive syndrome tends to be, at least in its classical present presentation, more asymmetric in its presentation of parkinsonism, with features including things like dystonic features, okay? For limb dystonia and apraxias---so, inability to do a learned behavior. One of those red flags is a patient who comes in and says, my hand doesn't work anymore, which is something extremely uncommon that you hear in Parkinson's disease. Most of those patients will present, say, I might have a tremor, but they very rarely will tell you that I can't use my hand. So look out for that sign. Dr Monteith: And let's talk a little bit about some of the advances in the fields you mentioned, evolving biomarker and imaging capacities. So, how are these advances useful in helping us understand these conditions, especially when there's so much heterogeneity? Dr Farland: I might start by talking a little bit about some of the clinical criteria that have advanced. Why don’t we start there and just discuss some of the advances? I think in PSP, I think, originally we had both probable and possible diagnoses of PSP, and the diagnostic criteria were basically focused on what was what's called “classical PSP” or “Richardson syndrome”. But now we recognize that there are multiple phenotypes. There's an overlap with Parkinsonism that's slower in progression and morphs into PSP, the classical form. There's a frontal behavioral variant where patients present with that frontal behavioral kind of thing. There's a speech-language variant that can overlap with PSP. So they have prominent speech language, potentially even apraxia speech. So, recognition of these different phenotypes is sort of a new thing in this field. There's even overlap with cortical basal syndrome and PSP, and we note that the pathology can overlap as well. So, I think that's one of the things that have changed over time. And these were- recently came out in 2017 in a new publication in the Movement Disorders Society. So, in terms of diagnostic tests as well---and there's been quite a bit of evolution---really still to date, our best diagnostic test is imaging. MRI is really one of our best tests currently. Currently blood tests, spinal fluid, there's new biomarkers in terms of skin… they're still in the research phase and not necessarily very specific yet. So, we rely heavily on imaging still; and for PSP, what we're looking for largely are changes in the brain stem, and particularly focused on the midbrain. So disproportionate midbrain atrophy compared to the pons and the rest of the midbrain is a fairly specific intensive sign for PSP. Whereas in MSA we see more of a pontine atrophy compared to the midbrain. So that can be really helpful, and there are lots of different new measurements that can be done. PET scans are also being used as well. And there are new PET markers, but they still remain kind of research-based, but are becoming more and more prevalent and may be available soon for potential use. Although there's some overlap with PET tracers with Alzheimer's disease and different Tau isoforms. So, something to be wary about, but we will be seeing some of these soon coming out as well. More kind of up-to-date things include things like the spinal fluid as well as even some of the skin biopsies. And I think we've heard some word of recent studies that have come out that potentially in the very near future we might actually have some Tau protein tests that we can look at Tau either in spinal fluid or even in a skin biopsy. But again, still remains research-based and, we still need more information as to whether these tests can be reproducible and how sensitive or specific they are. Dr Monteith: It sounds like, when really approaching these patients, still, it's a lot of back to the history, back to the clinical and some basic imaging that we should be able to identify to distinguish these types of patients, and we're not quite where we need to be yet for biomarker. Dr Farland: I totally agree with you. I think it starts, really, with the clinical exam and that's our main focus here; and understanding some of the new clinical criteria which are more sensitive, but also specific, too. And they're really useful to look at. So, I think reviewing those; patients do progress, following them over time can be really useful. And then for diagnosis, getting imaging if you suspect a patient has an atypical presentation of parkinsonism, to look for signs or features that might be specific for these different disorders. Dr Monteith: Why don't we take a typical case, a typical patient that you would see in clinic, and walk us through the thought process---especially, maybe they presented somewhat early---and the different treatment approaches to helping the patient, and of course their family. Dr Farland: Yeah, sure. So, a typical patient might be someone who comes in with, like, a three year history of progressive gait problems and falling. And let's say the patient says, I'm falling backwards frequently. They may have had, like, a rib fracture, or they hit their head once, and they're describing some speech issues as well. Now they're relying on a walker and family members saying they rarely let them be by themselves. And there may be some slowing of their cognitive function and maybe a bit of withdrawal. So that's a typical patient. So, the approach here is really, what are some of the red flags? I think already you hear a red flag of a rapidly progressive disease. So, Parkinson's disease patients rarely have frequent falls within the first five years. So, this is within three years or less. You're already hearing early onset of gait problems and falling, and particularly falling backwards rather than forwards as often Parkinson's disease patients do. You're hearing early speech problems and maybe a subtle hint of cognitive slowing and some withdrawal. So, a lot of things that sort of are red flags. So, our approach really would be examining this patient really closely. Okay? We'd be listening to the history, looking at the patient. One thing is that some of these patients come in, they may be in a wheelchair already. That's a red flag for us. If they're wearing sunglasses---sometimes we see that patients, they have photosensitivity and they're in a chair and they're wearing sunglasses---you take the glasses off and you look at their face and they have that sort of a facial stare to them---not just the masked face, but the stare---and their eyes really aren't moving. So, another kind of clue, maybe this is probably something atypical, particularly PSP is what I'm thinking about. So, the approach is really, do a thorough exam. I always recommend looking at eye movements and starting with volitional saccades, not giving them a target necessarily, but asking them to look up and then look down. And then particularly look at the speed of downgaze and whether they actually have full versions down, are able to do that. That's probably your most sensitive test for a patient who has PSP. Not the upgaze, which can be- upgaze impairment in older patients can be nonspecific. So, look for that down gaze. So, if I can get out one message, that's one thing that can be easily done and examined fairly quickly for diagnosis of these patients. And then just look for signs of rigidity, bradykinesia, maybe even some myelopraxia, and then look at their gait carefully so that there's a high suspicion. Again, if there's some atypical features, imaging is really important. So, my next step would be probably getting an MRI to evaluate whether- do they have brain somatrophy or other widespread atrophy or other signs? You need to think about your differential diagnosis for some of these patients as well. So, common things are common; vascular disease, you can't have vascular parkinsonism or even signs of NPH. Both of those can present with progressive gait difficulty and falls. So, the gait may look more like Parkinson's rather than ataxic gait that we see in classic PSP, but still they have early gait issues, and that can be a mimicker of PSP, So looking for both of those things in your imaging. Think about sort of autoimmune potentially causes. So, if they have a really rapid progressive cause, there are some rare autoimmune things. There have been recent reports of things like IgLON5, although there's limited cases, but we're doing more screening for some of those autoimmune causes. And then even some infectious causes like Whipples, that are rarely present like this. Okay? And have other signs and features. Dr Monteith: So, let's say you diagnose this patient with PSP and you're assessing the patients to see how you can improve their quality of life. So, what are some potential symptomatic managements that will help our patient? Dr Farland: I recommend for most all of these patients… while the literature indicates that many patients with PSP, and especially corticobasal syndrome, don't respond well to levodopa. So, the classic treatment for parkinsonism. However, we all recommend a trial of levodopa. These patients may respond partially to doses of levodopa, and we try to push the doses a bit higher. So, the recommended trial is usually a dose up to roughly 1000 milligrams of levodopa per day. And give it some time, at least two, if not actually three months of a trial. If not well-tolerated, you can back off. If there's no response at all or no improvement, then slowly back off and taper patients off and ask them to tell you whether they feel like they're actually worsening. So, many patients, sometimes, don't recognize the improvements, or family members don't recognize it until we actually taper them back off. And they may end up saying there are some other things that even recognize. Even some nonmotor benefits can be seen with levodopa. In some cases, we do keep them on levodopa, but levodopa's our best therapy for this. Dopamine agonists, MAO inhibitors, have all been sort of tried and they’ve been studied, but often don't really help or fail to help benefit these patients and could be fraught with some other side effects. I think many people do also turn to Amantadine as a treatment for Parkinson's, gait problems, freezing, if you see it in these disorders. Yet Amantadine is fraught with issues of side effects, including cognitive issues, and I think is not well-tolerated. But there are the rare patient who actually does respond to this or claims they respond to this. By and large, these patients relentlessly progress, unfortunately. So, beside treatment of other symptoms, I think it's really important to recognize that they require supportive cares and therapy. So, starting those early on and getting your allied healthcares kind of involved. So that includes people like physical,...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431570
info_outline
Multiple System Atrophy With Dr. Tao Xie
08/20/2025
Multiple System Atrophy With Dr. Tao Xie
Multiple system atrophy is a rare, sporadic, adult-onset, progressive, and fatal neurodegenerative disease. Accurate and early diagnosis remains challenging because it presents with a variable combination of symptoms across the autonomic, extrapyramidal, cerebellar, and pyramidal systems. Advances in brain imaging, molecular biomarker research, and efforts to develop disease-modifying agents have shown promise to improve diagnosis and treatment. In this episode, Casey Albin, MD speaks with Tao Xie, MD, PhD, author of the article “Multiple System Atrophy” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Albin is a Continuum® Audio interviewer, associate editor of media engagement, and an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Xie is director of the Movement Disorder Program, chief of the Neurodegenerative Disease Section in the department of neurology at the University of Chicago Medicine in Chicago, Illinois. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr. Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Albin: Hello everyone, this is Dr Casey Albin. Today I'm interviewing Dr Tao Xie about his article on diagnosis and management of multiple system atrophy, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Xie: Thank you so much, Dr Albin. My name is Tao Xie, and sometimes people also call me Tao Z. I'm a mood disorder neurologist, professor of neurology at the University of Chicago. I'm also in charge of the mood disorder program here, and I'm the section chief in the neurodegenerative disease in the Department of Neurology at the University of Chicago Medicine. Thank you for having me, Dr Albin and Dr Okun and the American Academy of Neurology. This is a great honor and pleasure to be involved in this education session. Dr Albin: We are delighted to have you, and thank you so much for the thoughtful approach to the diagnosis and management. I really want to encourage our listeners to check out this article. You know, one of the things that you emphasize is multiple system atrophy is a fairly rare condition. And I suspect that clinicians and trainees who even have a fair amount of exposure to movement disorders may not have encountered that many cases. And so, I was hoping that you could just start us off and walk us through what defines multiple system atrophy, and then maybe a little bit about how it's different from some of the more commonly encountered movement disorders. Dr Xie: This is a really good question, Dr Albin. Indeed, MSA---multisystem atrophy----is a rare disease. It is sporadic, adult-onset, progressive, fatal neurodegenerative disease. By the name MSA, multisystem atrophy. Clinically, it will present with multiple symptoms and signs involving multiple systems, including symptoms of autonomic dysfunction and symptoms of parkinsonism, which is polyresponsive to the levodopa treatment; and the symptom of cerebellar ataxia, and symptom of spasticity and other motor and nonmotor symptoms. And you may be wondering, what is the cause- underlying cause of these symptoms? Anatomically, we can find the area in the basal ganglia striatonigral system, particularly in the putamen and also in the cerebellar pontine inferior, all of the nuclear area and the specific area involved in the autonomic system in the brain stem and spinal cord: all become smaller. We call it atrophy. Because of the atrophy in this area, they are responsible for the symptom of parkinsonism if it is involved in the putamen and the cerebral ataxia, if it's involved in the pons and cerebral peduncle and the cerebellum. And all other area, if it's involved in the autonomic system can cause autonomic symptoms as well. So that's why we call it multisystem atrophy. And then what's the underlying cellular and subcellular pathological, a hallmark that is in fact caused by misfolded alpha-synuclein aggregate in the oligodontia site known as GCI---glial cytoplasmic increasing bodies---in the cells, and sometimes it can also be found in the neuronal cell as well in those areas, as mentioned, which causes the symptom. But clinically, the patient may not present all the symptoms at the same time. So, based on the predominant clinical symptom, if it's mainly levodopa, polyresponsive parkinsonism, then we call it MSAP. If it's mainly cerebellar ataxia, then we call it MSAC. But whether we call it MSP or MSC, they all got to have autonomic dysfunction. And also as the disease progresses, they can also present both phenotypes together. We call that mixed cerebellar ataxia and parkinsonism in the advanced stage of the disease. So, it is really a complicated disease. The complexity and the similarity to other mood disorders, including parkinsonism and the cerebellar ataxia, make it really difficult sometimes, particularly at the early stages of disease, to differentiate one from the other. So, that was challenging not only for other professionals, general neurologists and even for some movement disorder specialists, that could be difficult particularly if you aim to make an accurate and early diagnosis. Dr Albin: Absolutely. That is such a wealth of knowledge here. And I'm going to distill it just a little bit just to make sure that I understand this right. There is alpha-synuclein depositions, and it's really more widespread than one would see maybe in just Parkinson's disease. And with this, you are having patients present with maybe one of two subtypes of their clinical manifestations, either with a Parkinson's-predominant movement disorder pattern or a cerebellar ataxia type movement disorder pattern. Or maybe even mixed, which really, you know, we have to make things quite complicated, but they are all unified and having this shared importance of autonomic features to the diagnosis. Have I got that all sort of correct? Dr Xie: Correct. You really summarize well. Dr Albin: Fantastic. I mean, this is quite a complicated disease. I would pose to you sort of a case, and I imagine this is quite common to what you see in your clinic. And let's say, you know, a seventy-year-old woman comes to your clinic because she has had rigidity and poor balance. And she's had several falls already, almost always from ground level. And her family tells you she's quite woozy whenever she gets up from the chair and she tends to kind of fall over. But they noticed that she's been stiff,and they've actually brought her to their primary care doctor and he thought that she had Parkinson's disease. So, she started levodopa, but they're coming to you because they think that she probably needs a higher dose. It's just not working out very well for her. So how would you sort of take that history and sort of comb through some of the features that might make you more concerned that the patient actually has undiagnosed multiple systems atrophy? Dr Xie: This is a great case, because we oftentimes can encounter similar cases like this in the clinic. First of all, based on the history you described, it sounds like an atypical parkinsonism based on the slowness, rigidity, stiffness; and particularly the early onset of falls, which is very unusual for typical Parkinson disease. It occurs too early. If its loss of balance, postural instability, and fall occurred within three years of disease onset---usually the motor symptom onset---then it raises a red flag to suspect this must be some atypical Parkinson disorders, including multiple system atrophy. Particularly, pou also mentioned that the patient is poorly responsive to their levodopa therapy, which is very unusual because for Parkinson disease, idiopathic Parkinson disease, we typically expect patients would have a great response to the levodopa, particularly in the first 5 to 7 years. So to put it all together, this could be atypical parkinsonism, and I could not rule out the possibility of MSA. Then I need to check more about other symptoms including autonomic dysfunction, such as orthostatic hypertension, which is a blood pressure drop when the patient stands up from a lying-down position, or other autonomic dysfunctions such as urinary incontinence or severe urinary retention. So, in the meantime, I also have to put the other atypical Parkinson disorder on the differential diagnosis, such as PSP---progressive supranuclear palsy---and the DLBD---dementia with Lewy body disease.---Bear this in mind. So, I want to get more history and more thorough bedside assessment to rule in or rule out my diagnosis and differential diagnosis. Dr Albin: That's super helpful. So, looking for early falls, the prominence of autonomic dysfunction, and then that poor levodopa responsiveness while continuing to sort of keep a very broad differential diagnosis? Dr Xie: Correct. Dr Albin: One of the things that I just have to ask, because I so taken by this, is that you say in the article that some of these patients actually have preservation of smell. In medical school, we always learn that our Parkinson's disease patients kind of had that early loss of smell. Do you find that to be clinically relevant? Is that- does that anecdotally help? Dr Xie: This is a very interesting point because we know that the loss of smelling function is a risk effect, a prodromal effect, for the future development of Parkinson disease. But it is not the case for MSA. Strange enough, based on the literature and the studies, it is not common for the patient with MSA to present with anosmia. Some of the patients may have mild to moderate hyposmia, but not to the degree of anosmia. So, this is why even in the more recent diagnosis criteria, the MDS criteria published 2022, it even put the presence of anosmia in the exclusion criteria. So, highlight the importance of the smell function, which is well-preserved for the majority in MSA, into that category. So, this is a really interesting point and very important for us, particularly clinicians, to know the difference in the hyposmia, anosmia between the- we call it the PD, and the dementia Lewy bodies versus MSA. Dr Albin: Fascinating. And just such a cool little tidbit to take with us. So, the family, you know, you're talking to them and they say, oh yes, she has had several fainting episodes and we keep taking her to the primary care doctor because she's had urinary incontinence, and they thought maybe she had urinary tract infections. We've been dealing with that. And you're sort of thinking, hm, this is all kind of coming together, but I imagine it is still quite difficult to make this diagnosis based on history and physical alone. Walk our listeners through sort of how you're using MRI and DAT scan and maybe even some other biomarkers to help sort of solidify that diagnosis. Dr Xie: Yeah, that's a wonderful question. Yeah. First of all, UTI is very common for patients with MSA because of urinary retention, which puts them into a high risk of developing frequent UTI. That, for some patients, could be the very initial presentation of symptoms. In this case, if we check, we say UTI is not present or UTI is present but we treat it, then we check the blood pressure and we do find also hypertension---according to new diagnosis criteria, starting drop is 20mm mercury, but that's- the blood pressure drop is ten within three minutes. And also, in the meantime the patients present persistent urinary incontinence even after UTI was treated. And then the suspicion for MS is really high right at this point. But if you want increased certainty and a comfortable level on your diagnosis, then we also need to look at the brain MRI mark. This is a required according to the most recent MDS diagnosis criteria. The presence of the MRI marker typical for MSA is needed for the diagnosis of clinically established MSA, which holds the highest specificity in the clinical diagnosis. So then, we have- we’re back to your question. We do need to look at the brain MRI to see whether evidence suggestive of atrophy around the putamen area, around the cerebellar pontine inferior olive area, is present or not. Dr Albin: Absolutely. That's super helpful. And I think clinicians will really take that to sort of helping to build a case and maybe recognizing some of this atypical Parkinson's disease as a different disease entity. Are there any other biomarkers in the pipeline that you're excited about that may give us even more clarity on this diagnosis? Dr Xie: Oh, yeah. This is a very exciting area. In terms of biomarker for the brain imaging, particularly brain MRI, in fact, today there's a landmark paper just published in the Java Neurology using AI, artificial intelligence or machine learning aid, diagnoses a patient with parkinsonism including Parkinson's disease, MSA, and PSP, with very high diagnostic accuracy ranging from 96% to 98%. And some of the cases even were standard for autopsy, with pathological verification at a very high accurate rate of 93.9%. This is quite amazing and can really open new diagnosis tools for us to diagnose this difficult disease; not only in an area with a bunch of mood disorder experts, but also in the rural area, in the area really in need of mood disorder experts. They can provide tremendous help to provide accurate, early diagnosis. Dr Albin: That's fantastic and I love that, increasing the access to this accurate diagnosis. What can't artificial intelligence do for us? That's just incredible. Dr Xie: And also, you know, this is just one example of how the brain biomarker can help us. Theres other---a fluid biomarker, molecular diagnostic tools, is also available. Just to give you an example, one thing we know over the past couple years is skin biopsy. Through the immunofluorescent reaction, we can detect whether the hallmark of abnormally folded, misfolded, and the phosphorate, the alpha-synuclein aggregate can be found just by this little pinch of skin biopsy. Even more advanced, there's another diagnosis tool we call the SAA, we call the seizure amplification assay, that can even help us to differentiate MSA from other alpha-synucleinopathy, including Parkinson disease and dementia with Lewy bodies. If we get a little sample from CSF, spinal cerebral fluids, even though this is probably still at the early stage, a lot of developments still ongoing, but this, this really shows you how exciting this area is now. We’re really in a fast forward-moving path now. Dr Albin: It's really incredible. So, lots coming down the track in, sort of, MRI, but also with CSF diagnosis and skin biopsies. Really hoping that we can hone in some of those tools as they become more and more validated to make this diagnosis. Is that right? Dr Xie: Correct. Dr Albin: Amazing. We can talk all day about how you manage these in the clinic, and I really am going to direct our listeners to go and read your fantastic article, because you do such an elegant job talking about how this takes place in a multidisciplinary setting, if at all possible. But as a neurointensivist, I was telling you, we have so much trouble in the hospital. We have A-lines, and we have the ability to get rapid KUBs to look at Ilias, and we can have many people as lots of diagnosis, and we still have a lot of trouble treating autonomiclike symptoms. Really, really difficult. And so, I just wanted to kind of pick your brain, and I'll start with just the one of orthostatic hypotension. What are some of the tips that you have for, you know, clinicians that are dealing with this? Because I imagine that this is quite difficult to do without patients. Dr Xie: Exactly. This is indeed a very difficult symptom to deal with, particularly at an outpatient setting. But nowadays with the availability of more medication---to give an example, to treat patients with orthostatic hypertension, we have not only midodrine for the cortisol, we also have droxidopa and several others as well. And so, we have more tools at hand to treat the patient with orthostatic hypertension. But I think the key thing here, particularly for us to the patient at the outpatient setting: we need to educate the patient’s family well about the natural history of the disease course. And we also need to tell them what's the indication and the potential side effect profile of any medication we prescribe to them so that they can understand what to expect and what to watch for. And in the meantime, we also need to keep really effective and timely communication channels, make sure that the treating physician and our team can be reached at any time when the patient and family need us so that we can be closely monitoring, their response, and also monitoring potential side effects as well to keep up the quality of care in that way. Dr Albin: Yeah, I imagine that that open communication plays a huge role in just making sure that patients are adapting to their symptoms, understanding that they can reach out if they have refractory symptoms, and that- I imagine this takes a lot of fine tuning over time. Dr Xie: Correct. Dr Albin: Well, this has just been such a delight to get to talk to you. I really feel like we could dive even deeper, but I know for the sake of time we have to kind of close out. Are there any final points that you wanted to share with our listeners before we end the interview? Dr Xie: I think for the patients, I want them to know that nowadays with advances in science and technology, particularly given a sample of rapid development in the diagnostic tools and the multidisciplinary and multisystemic approach to treatment, nowadays we can make an early and accurate diagnosis of the MSA, and also, we can provide better treatment. Even though so far it is still symptomatically, mainly, but in the near future we hope we can also discover disease-modifying treatment which can slow down, even pause or prevent the disease from happening. And for the treating physician and care team professionals, I just want them to know that you can make a difference and greatly help the patient and the family through your dedicated care and also through your active learning and innovative research. You can make a difference. Dr Albin: That's amazing and lots of hope for these patients. Right now, you can provide really great care to take care of them, make an early and accurate diagnosis; but on the horizon, there are really several things that are going to move the field forward, which is just so exciting. Again today, I've been really greatly honored and privileged to be able to talk to Dr Tao Xie about his article on diagnosis and management of multiple system atrophy, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes for this and other issues. And thank you again to our listeners for joining us today. Dr Xie: Thank you so much for having me. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431505
info_outline
Essential Tremor With Dr. Ludy Shih
08/13/2025
Essential Tremor With Dr. Ludy Shih
Essential tremor is the most common movement disorder, although it is often misdiagnosed. A careful history and clinical examination for other neurologic findings, such as bradykinesia, dystonia, or evidence of peripheral neuropathy, can reveal potential alternative etiologies. Knowledge about epidemiology and associated health outcomes is important for counseling and monitoring for physical impairment and disability. In this episode, Lyell Jones, MD, FAAN, speaks with Ludy C. Shih, MD, MMSc, FAAN, author of the article “Essential Tremor” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Jones is the editor-in-chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology® and is a professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Shih is clinical director of the Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorders Center at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. Today, I'm interviewing Dr Ludy Shih, who recently authored an article on essential tremor for our latest issue of Continuum on movement disorders. Dr Shih is an associate professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School and the clinical director of the Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorder Center at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. Dr Shih, welcome, and thank you for joining us today. Why don't you introduce yourself to our listeners? Dr Shih: Thank you, Dr Jones, for having me. It's a real pleasure to be here on the podcast with you. I'm a neurologist, I trained in movement disorders fellowship, and I currently see patients and conduct clinical research. We offer a variety of treatments and diagnostic tests for our patients with movement disorders. And I have developed this interest, a clinical research interest in essential tremor. Dr Jones: And so, as an expert in essential tremor, the perfect person to write such a really spectacular article. And I can't wait for our listeners to hear more about it and our subscribers to read it. And let's get right to it. If you had, Dr Shih, a single most important message for our listeners about caring for patients with essential tremor, what would that message be? Dr Shih: Yeah, I think the takeaway that I've learned over the years is that people with essential tremor do develop quite a few other symptoms. And although we propose that essential tremor is this pure tremor disorder, they can experience a lot of different comorbidities. Now, there is some debate as to whether that is expected for essential tremor or is this some part of another syndrome, which we may talk about later in the interview. But the fact of the matter is, it's not a benign condition and people do experience some disability from it. Dr Jones: And I think that speaks to how the name of this disorder has evolved over time. right? You point out in your article, it used to be called benign essential tremor or benign familial tremor. But it's really not so straightforward as it. And fairly frequently these symptoms, the patient's tremor, can be functionally limiting, correct? Dr Shih: That is correct. In fact, the reason I probably started getting interested in essential tremor was because our center had been doing a lot of deep brain stimulation for essential tremor, which is remarkably effective, especially for tremor that reaches an amplitude that really no oral medication is going to satisfyingly treat. And if you have enough upper limb disability from this very large-amplitude tremor, a surgical option may make a lot of sense for a lot of patients. And yet, how did they get to that point? Do they continue to progress? These were the sort of interesting questions that got raised in my mind as I started to treat these folks. Dr Jones: We'll come back to treatment in just a minute here, because there are many options, and it sounds like the options are expanding. To start with the diagnosis- I mean, this is an extraordinarily common disorder. As you point out, it is the most common movement disorder in the US and maybe the world, and yet it seems to be underrecognized and frequently misdiagnosed. Why do you think that is? Dr Shih: Great question. It's been pretty consistent, with several case series over the decades showing a fairly high rate of quote/unquote “misdiagnosis.” And I think it speaks to two things, probably. One is that once someone sees a postural and kinetic tremor of the arms, immediately they think of essential tremor because it is quite common. But there's a whole host of things that it could actually be. And the biggest one that we also have to factor in is also the heterogeneity of the presentation of Parkinson's disease. Many people, and I think increasingly now these days, can present with not a whole lot of the other symptoms, but may present with an atypical tremor. And it becomes actually a little hard to sort out, well, do they have enough of these other symptoms for me to suspect Parkinson's, or is the nature of their tremor suspicious enough that it would just be so unusual that this stays essential tremor and doesn't eventually develop into Parkinson’s disease? And I think those are the questions that we all still grapple with from time to time in some of our clinics. Dr Jones: Probably some other things related to it with, you know, our understanding of the pathophysiology and the availability of tests. And I do want to come back to those questions here in just a minute, but, you know, just the nomenclature of this disorder… I think our clinical listeners are familiar with our tendency in medicine to use words like essential or idiopathic to describe disorders or phenomena where we don't understand the precise underlying mechanism. When I'm working with our trainees, I call these “job-security terms” because it sounds less humbling than “you have a tremor and we don't know what causes it,” right? So, your article does a really nice job outlining the absence of a clear monogenic or Mendelian mechanism for essential tremor. Do you think we'll ever have a eureka moment in neurology for this disorder and maybe give it a different name? Dr Shih: It's a great question. I think as we're learning with a lot of our neurologic diseases---and including, I would even say, Parkinson's disease, to which ET gets compared to a lot---there's already now so much more known complexity to something that has a very specific idea and concept in people's minds. So, I tend to think we'll still be in an area where we'll have a lot of different causes of tremor, but I'm hopeful that we'll uncover some new mechanisms for which treating or addressing that mechanism would take care of the tremor in a way that we haven't been able to make as much progress on in the last few decades as maybe we would have thought given all the advances in in technology. Dr Jones: That's very helpful, and we'll be hopeful for that series of discoveries that lead us to that point. I think many of our listeners will be familiar with the utility---and, I think, even for most insurance companies, approval---for DAT scans to discriminate between essential tremor and Parkinsonian disorders. What about lab work? Are there any other disorders that you commonly screen for in patients who you suspect may have essential tremor? Dr Shih: Yeah, it's a great question. And I think, you know, I'm always mindful that what I'm seeing in my clinic may not always be representative of what's seen in the community or out in practice. I'll give an example. You know, most of the time when people come to the academic Medical Center, they're thinking, gosh, I've tried this or that. I've been on these medicines for the last ten years. But I've had essential tremor for twenty years. We get to benefit a little bit from all that history that's been laid down. And so, it's not as likely you're going to misdiagnose it. But once in a while, you'll get someone with tremor that just started a month ago or just started, you know, 2 or 3 months ago. And you have to still be thinking, well, I’ve got to get out of the specialist clinic mindset, and think, well, what else really could this be? And so, while it's true for everybody, moreso in those cases, in those recent onset cases, you really got to be looking for things like medications, electrolyte abnormalities, and new-onset thyroid disorder, for example, thyroid toxicosis. Dr Jones: Very helpful. And your article has a wonderful list of the conditions to consider, including the medications that might be used for those conditions that might result or unmask a tremor of a different cause. And I think being open-minded and not anchoring on essential tremor just because it's common, I think is a is a key point here. And another feature in your article that I really enjoyed was your step-by-step approach to tremor. What are those steps? Dr Shih: Well, I think you know first of all, tremor is such common terminology that even lay people, patients, nonclinicians will use the word “tremor.” And so, it can be tempting when the notes on your schedule says referred for tremor to sort of immediately jump to that. I think the first step is, is it tremor? And that's really something that the clinician first has to decide. And I think that's a really important step. A lot of things can look superficially like tremor, and you shouldn't even assume that another clinician knows what tremor looks like as opposed to, say, myoclonus. Or for example a tremor of the mouth; well, it actually could be orolingual or orobuccal dyskinesia, as in tardive dyskinesia. And another one that tremor can look like is ataxia. And so, I think- while they sound obvious to most neurologists, perhaps, I think that---especially in the area of myoclonus, where it can be quite repetitive, quite small amplitude in some conditions---it can really resemble a tremor. And so, there are examples of these where making that first decision of whether it's a tremor or not can really be a good sort of time-out to make sure you're going down the right path to begin with. And I think what's helpful is to think about some of the clinical definitions of a tremor. And tremor is really rhythmic, it's oscillatory. You should see an agonist and antagonist muscle group moving back and forth, to and fro. And then it's involuntary. And so, I think these descriptors can really help; and to help isolate, if you can describe it in your note, you can probably be more convinced that you're dealing with the tremor. The second step that I would encourage people to really consider: you've established it’s a tremor. The most important part exam now becomes, really, the nontremor part of the exam. And it should be really comprehensive to think of what else could be accompanying this, because that's really how we make diagnosis of other things besides essential tremor. There really should be a minimum of evidence of parkinsonism, dystonia, neuropathy, ataxia- and the ataxia could be either from a peripheral or central nervous system etiology. Those are the big four or five things that, you know, I'm very keen to look for and will look pretty much in the head, neck, the axial sort of musculature, as well as the limbs. And I think this is very helpful in terms of identifying cases which turn out to have either, say, well, Parkinson's or even a typical Parkinson disorder; or even a genetic disorder, maybe even something like a fragile X tremor ataxia syndrome; or even a spinal cerebellar ataxia. These cases are rare, but I think if you uncover just enough ataxia, for example, that really shouldn't be there in a person, let's say, who's younger and also doesn't have a long history of tremor; you should be more suspicious that this is not essential tremor that you're dealing with. And then the last thing is, once you've identified the tremor and you're trying to establish, well, what should be done about the tremor, you really have to say what kind of tremor it is so that you can follow it, so you can convey to other people really what the disability is coming from the tremor and how severe the tremor is. So, I think an example of this is, often in the clinic, people will have their patients extend their arms and hands and kind of say, oh, it's an essential tremor, and that's kind of the end of the exam. But it doesn't give you the flavor. Sometimes you'll have a patient come in and have a fairly minimal postural tremor, but then you go out, take those extra few seconds to go grab a cup of water or two cups of water and have them pour or drink. And now all of a sudden you see this tremor is quite large-amplitude and very disabling. Now you have a better appreciation of what you really need to do for this patient, and it might not be present with just these very simple maneuvers that you have at bedside without props and items. And then the severity of it; you know, we're so used to saying mild, moderate, severe. I think what we've done in the Tremor Research Group to use and develop the Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale is to get people used to trying to estimate what size the tremor is. And you can do that by taking a ruler or developing a sense of what 1 centimeter, 2 centimeters, 3 centimeters looks like. I think it'd be tremendously helpful too, it's very easy and quick to convey severity in a given patient. Dr Jones: I appreciate you, you know, having a patient-centered approach to the- how this is affecting them and being quantitative in the assessment of the tremor. And that's a great segue to a key question that I run into and I think others run into, which is when to initiate therapy? You know, if you see a patient who, let's say they have a mild tremor or, you know, something that quantitatively is on the mild end of the spectrum, and you have, you know, a series of options… from a medication perspective, you have to say, well, when does this across that threshold of being more likely to benefit the patient than to harm the patient? How do you approach that question? What's your threshold for starting medication? Dr Shih: Yeah. You know, sometimes I will ask, because---and I know this sounds like a strange question---because I feel like my patients will come for a couple of different reasons. Sometimes it's usually one over the other. I think people can get concerned about a symptom of a tremor. So, I actually will ask them, was your goal to just get a sense for what this tremor is caused by? I understand that many people who develop tremor might be concerned it might be something like Parkinson's disease. Or is this also a tremor that is bothering you in day-to-day life? And often you will hear the former. No, I just wanted to get checked out and make sure you don't think it's Parkinson's. It doesn't bother me enough that I want to take medication. They're quite happy with that. And then the second scenario is more the, yeah, no, it bothers me and it's embarrassing. And that's a very common answer you may hear, may be embarrassing, people are noticing. It's funny in that many people with essential tremor don't come to see a doctor or even the neurologist for many years. And they will put up with it for a very long time. And they've adopted all sorts of compensatory strategies, and they've just been able to handle themselves very admirably with this, in some cases, very severe tremor. So, for some of them, it'll take a lot to come to the doctor, and then it becomes clear. They said, I think I'm at the point where I need to do something about this tremor. And so, I think those three buckets are often sort of where my patients fall into. And I think asking them directly will give you a sense of that. But you know, it can be a nice time to try some as-needed doses of something like Propranolol, or if it's something that you know that they're going to need something on day-to-day to get control of the tremor over time, there are other options for that as well. Dr Jones: Seems like a perfect scenario for shared decision-making. Is it bothersome enough to the patient to try the therapy? And I like that suggestion. That's a nice pearl that you could start with an a- needed beta blocker, right, with Propranolol. And this is a question that I think many of us struggle with as well. If you've followed a patient with essential tremor for some time and you've tried different medications and they've either lost effectiveness or have intolerable adverse effects, what is your threshold for referring a patient for at least considering a surgical neurostimulator therapy for their essential tremor? Dr Shih: Yeah, so surgical therapies for tremor have been around for a long time now, since 1997, which was when it was approved by the FDA for essential tremor and Parkinson tremor. And then obviously since then, we have a couple more options in the focus ultrasound thalamotomy, which is a lesioning technique. When you have been on several tremor medications, the list gets smaller and smaller. It- and then chance of likely satisfying benefit from some of these medications can be small and small as you pass through the first and second line agents and these would be the Propranolol and the primidone. And as you say, quite a few patients- it's estimated between 30 to 50% of these patients end up not tolerating these first two medications and end up discontinuing them. Some portion of that might also be due to the fact that some of our patients who have been living with essential tremor for decades now, to the point that their tremor is getting worse, are also getting older. And so, polypharmacy and/or some of the potential side effects of beta blockers and anticonvulsants like primidone may be harder to bear in an older adult. And then as you talk about in the article, there's some level of evidence for topiramate, and then from there a number of anticonvulsants or benzos, which have even weaker evidence for them. It's a personal decision. As I tell folks, look, this is not going to likely extend your life or save your life, but it's a quality of life issue. And of course, if there are other things going on in life that need to be taken care of and they need that kind of care and attention, then, you know, you don't need to be adding this to your plate. But if you are in the position where those other things are actually okay, but quality of life is really affected by your being unable to use your upper limbs in the way that you would like to… A lot of people's hobbies and applications are upper limb-based, and enjoying those things is really important. Then I think that this is something- a conversation that we begin and we begin by talking about yes, there are some risks involved, but fortunately this is the data we have on it, which is a fairly extensive experience in terms of this is the risk of, you know, surgery-related side effects. This is the risk of if you're having stimulation from DBS stimulation-related side effects, which can be adjustable. It's interesting, I was talking with colleagues, you know, after focused ultrasound thalamotomy was approved. That really led more people to come to the clinic and start having these discussions, because that seemed like a very the different sort of approach where hardware wasn't needed, but it was still a...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431450
info_outline
Parkinson Disease With Dr. Ashley Rawls
08/06/2025
Parkinson Disease With Dr. Ashley Rawls
Parkinson disease is a neurodegenerative movement disorder that is increasing in prevalence as the population ages. The symptoms and rate of progression are clinically heterogenous, and medical management is focused on the individual needs of the patient. In this episode, Kait Nevel MD, speaks with Ashley Rawls, MD, MS, author of the article “Parkinson Disease” in the Continuum® August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. Dr. Nevel is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a neurologist and neuro-oncologist at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, Indiana. Dr. Rawls is an assistant professor at the University of Florida Health, Department of Neurology at the Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases in Gainesville, Florida Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Nevel: Hello, this is Dr Kait Nevel. Today I'm interviewing Dr Ashley Rawls about her article on Parkinson disease, which appears in the August 2025 Continuum issue on movement disorders. Ashley, welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to the audience. Dr Rawls: Thank you, Kait. Hello everyone, my name is Dr Ashley Rawls. I am a movement disorder specialist at the University of Florida Fixel Institute for Neurologic Diseases in Gainesville, Florida. It's a pleasure to be here. Dr Nevel: Awesome. To start us off talking about your article, can you share what you think is the most important takeaway for the practicing neurologist? Dr Rawls: Yes. I would say that my most important takeaway for this article is that Parkinson disease remains a clinical diagnosis. I think the field has really been advancing and trying to find a biomarker to help with diagnosis through ancillary testing. For example, with the dopamine transporter, the DAT scan, an alpha-synuclein skin biopsy, an alpha-synuclein amplification assay that can happen in blood and CSF. However, I think it's so critical to make sure that you have a very strong history and a very thorough physical exam and use those biomarkers or other testing to help with, kind of, bolstering your thoughts on what's going on with the patient. Dr Nevel: Great. And I can't wait to talk a little bit more about the ancillary testing and how you use that. Before we get to that, can you review with us some of the components of the clinical diagnosis of Parkinson disease? Dr Rawls: Yes. So, when I think about a person that comes in that might have a neurodegenerative disease, I think about two different features, mainly: both motor and Manon motor. So, for my motor features, I'm thinking about resting tremor, bradykinesia---which is fullness of movement with decrement over time---rigidity, and then a specific gait disturbance, a Parkinsonian gait, involving stooped posture, decreased arm swing. They can also have reemergent tremor while walking if they do have tremor as part of their disease process, and also in-block turning as they are walking down the hallway. So, those are my motor features that I look for. So now, when we're talking about a specific diagnosis of Parkinson disease, the one motor feature that you need to have is bradykinesia. The reason why I make sure to speak about bradykinesia, which is slowness of movement with decrement over time, is because people can still have Parkinson disease without having tremor, a resting tremor. So even though that's one of the core cardinal features that most of us will be able to notice very readily, you don't have to necessarily have a resting tremor to be diagnosed with Parkinson' disease. When I talk about nonmotor features, those are going to be the three, particularly the prodromal features that can occur even ten years before people have motor features, can be very prominent early on in the disease process. For example, hyposmia or anosmia for decrease or lack of sense of smell. Another one that we really look for is going to be RBD, or rapid eye movement behavior disorder; or REM behavior disorder, the person acting out their dreams, calling out, flailing their limbs, hitting their bed partner. And then the other one is going to be severe constipation. So those three prodromal nonmotor symptoms of hyposmia/anosmia, RBD or REM behavior disorder, and severe constipation can also make me concerned as a red flag that there is a sort of neurodegenerative issue like a Parkinson disease that may be going on with the patient. Dr Nevel: Great, thank you so much for that overview. While we're talking about the diagnosis, do you mind kind of going back to what you mentioned in the beginning and talking about the ancillary tests that sometimes are used to kind of help, again, bolster that diagnosis of Parkinson disease? You know, like the DAT or the alpha-synuclein skin biopsy. When should we be using those? Should we be getting these on everyone? And what scenarios should we really consider doing one of those tests? Dr Rawls: The scenario in which I would order one of the ancillary testing, particularly like a DAT scan or a skin biopsy, looking for alpha-synuclein is going to be when there are potential red flags or a little bit of confusion in regard to the history and physical that I need to have a little bit more clarification on. For example, if I have a patient that has a history of using dopamine blocking agents, for example, for severe depression; or they have a history of cancer diagnosis and they've been on a dopamine agent like metoclopramide; those I want to be mindful because if they're coming in to see me and they're having the symptoms of Parkinsonism---which is going to be resting tremor, bradykinesia rigidity, or gait disturbance---I need to try to figure out is it potentially due to a medication effect, particularly if they're still on the dopamine blockade medication, or is it something where they're actually having a neurodegenerative illness underneath it, like a Parkinson disease? The other situation that would make me order a DAT skin or a skin biopsy is going to be someone who is coming in that maybe has elements of essential tremor, they have more of a postural or an intention tremor that's very flapping and larger amplitude, and maybe have some mild symptoms and Parkinsonism that might be difficult to distinguish between other musculoskeletal things like arthritis, other imbalance issues from, you know, hip problems or knee problems and what have you. Then I might say, okay, let's see if there is some sort of neurodegeneration underneath this; that may be- that there could be, you know, potentially two elements like a central tremor and Parkinson disease going on. Or is this someone who actually really has Parkinson disease, but there's other factors that are kind of playing into that. Dr Nevel: Great, thank you for that. Gosh, things have really changed over the past fifteen years or so where we have this ancillary testing that we're able to use more, because what you read in the textbook isn't always what you see in clinic. And as you described, there are patients who… it's not as clear cut, and these tests can be helpful. Could you tell us more about the levodopa challenge test? How is this useful in clinical practice? And what are some key points that we should know about when utilizing this strategy for patients who we think have Parkinson disease? Dr Rawls: So, before we had all this ancillary testing with the DAT scan, the skin biopsy, the alpha-synuclein amplification assay, many times if you had a suspicion that a person that had Parkinson disease, but you weren't entirely sure, you would say, hey, listen, let us give you back the dopamine that your body may be missing and see if you have an improvement, in particular in your motor symptom. So, when I talk with my patients, I say, listen, I might have a strong suspicion that you have Parkinson disease. Doing a levodopa trial can not only be diagnostic, but also can be therapeutic as well. So, with this levodopa trial, what I end up doing is saying, okay, we're going to start the medication at a low dose because we are looking to see if you have improvement in three of the main cardinal motor symptoms. Obviously, tremor is much easier for us to see if it gets better. It's very obvious on exam, and the patients are more readily able to see it. Whereas stiffness and slowness is much harder to quantify and try to figure out. Am I stiff and slow because of potential muscle tightness from Parkinson disease, or is it something that's more of a musculoskeletal issue? So, I will tell persons, okay, we're looking for improvement in these three cardinal motor symptoms, and things that we're looking for is getting into and out of a car, into and out of a chair, turning over in bed, seeing how do we navigate ourselves in our daily lives? I give people the example of going through the grocery store, going through a busy airport. Are we able to move better and respond better to different changes in our environment which can give us a better clue of if our stiffness and slowness in particular are being improved with the medication? The other part of this is talking about potential side effects of the carbidopa- of the levodopa in particular. One big thing that I think limits people initially is going to be the nausea, vomiting, potential GI upset when starting this medication initially. So, oftentimes I will find people coming in, oh, you know, my outside doctor started me immediately on one tab of carbidopa/levodopa three times per day. I got nauseous, I threw up, and I never took the medication again. So often times I will start low and go slow because once someone throws up my medication, they are not going to want to take it again---with good reason. So, often times I will ask the patient, hey listen, are you very sensitive to medications? If you are very sensitive, we might start one tablet per day for a week, one tablet twice a day, and then go up until we get to two tablets three times a day if we're talking about carbidopa/levodopa. If someone is not as sensitive then I might go up a little bit quicker. What do we mean when we talk about 600 milligrams per day? So usually, the amount that I use is carbidopa/levodopa, 25/100; so, 100 milligrams being the levodopa portion. Many people just start off at 1 tab 3 times a day, which gives you 300 milligrams of levodopa, and they say, oh, it didn't work, I must not have Parkinson or something else. Well, it just may have been that we did not give an adequate trial and adequate dose to the person. Now if they're not able to tolerate the medication because of the side effects, that's something different. But if they don't have side effects and don't notice a difference, there is room to increase the carbidopa/levodopa or the levodopa replacement that you are using so that you can give it, you know, a very good try to see, is it actually improving resting tremor, bradykinesia and rigidity? Dr Nevel: Yeah, great. Thanks for that. When you diagnose a patient with Parkinson disease, how do you counsel that patient? How do you break that difficult news? And how do you counsel them on what to expect in the future and goals of treatment? I know that's a lot in that question, but it also is a lot that you do in one visit, oftentimes, or at least introduce these kind of concepts to patients in a single visit. Dr Rawls: One thing that I think is helpful for me is trying to understand where the patients and their families are when they come in. Because some of the patients come in and have no prior inkling that they may have a neurodegenerative illness like Parkinson disease. Some of my patients come in and say, I'm here for a second opinion for Parkinson disease. So, then I have an idea of where we are in regard to potential understanding of how to start the conversation going forward. If it is someone who is coming in and has not heard about Parkinson disease, or their family has not been made aware that that's the one reason why they're coming to see a movement disorder specialist, then I will start at the beginning After we finish our history, do a very thorough physical exam, I will talk about things that I heard in the history and that I see on the physical exam that make me concerned for a disease like Parkinson disease. I make sure to tell them where I'm getting my criteria from and not just start off, I think you have Parkinson, here's your medication. I think that's very jarring when you're talking with patients and their families, particularly if they had no idea that this could be a potential diagnosis on the table. Like I said, I will start off with recounting, this is what I've heard in your history that makes me concerned. This is what I've seen on your physical exam that makes me concerned. And I think you have Parkinson disease and here is why. And I'll tell them about the tenants like we discussed about Parkinson disease, both the motor and nonmotor symptoms that we see. So that's kind of the first part is, I make sure to lay it out and then open the room up for some questions and clarification. The other portion of this is that, when I'm talking about counseling the patient, I say, we do not expect Parkinson disease to decrease your lifespan. However, over time, our persons, because it is a neurodegenerative illnesses will accumulate deficits over time. So, more stiffness, more slowness, more walking problems. They may, if they have tremor, the tremor may become worse. If they don't have tremor, they might develop tremor in the future. If we're talking about the nonmotor symptoms that we talk about, the main ones are going to be issues with urinary problems, issues with bowels, and then the other thing is going to be neuropsychiatric issues like anxiety and depression. And those things become more prominent, usually, the nonmotor symptoms later on in the disease process, and then also cognitive impairment as well. I really want to make sure that they have the information that I'm seeing, and if there's anything that they want to correct on their end, as in they're saying, oh wait, well, actually I noticed something else, then that's usually when that comes out around kind of the wrapping-up portion of the visit. So, I think that's really important to, one, be very clear in what I am seeing and if there's red flags, and then tell them, okay this is not going to shorten your lifespan. However, over time, we do have other issues and problems that will arise and we can support you as best as we can through that. The one thing I also been very open with people about is- because our patients will say, is there anything I can do? What can be done? Is there any medication to slow down or stop things? And I let people know that unfortunately, right now there's not an intervention that slows down, stops, or reverses disease progression, with the exception of exercise. Consistent exercise has been found to help to slow down disease progression, okay? And also, it can help to release the dopamine already being made innately in the brain. And also, it can help with our cardiovascular health in the big thing: being balanced. Core strength, quadricep strength. So that's also something that people can work on that they should. And I let people know that exercise is as important as the medications themselves. Dr Nevel: Absolutely. And it's incredible how much they incorporate exercise into their daily lives and get active, people who weren't active before their diagnosis, and how much that can help. One question that I think patients sometimes ask is, when they understand how carbidopa/levodopa works and what the expectations are for that medication, that it's not a disease-modifying medication, but that it can help with their symptoms. And then they kind of hear, well as time goes on, they need higher doses or, you know, it doesn't control their motor symptoms as well. They'll say, okay well, is it better to wait then? Should I wait to start carbidopa/levodopa? Like in my mind, I'm only maybe going to get X amount of time from carbidopa/levodopa. So, I'd rather wait to start it than start it now. What do you say to them and how do you counsel them through that? Dr Rawls: So that is a common question that I do get with my patients. So, I tell people, I'm here for you. And it really depends on how you feel at this time. Because you have to weigh the risks and benefits of the medication itself. If someone who's very, very mild decides to take the medication, they feel nauseous, they're just going to say, hey, listen, it's not for me right now. I don't feel like I need it, and then stop, which is with definitely within their right. But what I always counsel patients as well is to say, the dopamine-producing neurons in the substantia nigra are starting to die over time. That is why we are getting the signs and symptoms of Parkinson disease. At some point, your brain is not going to produce enough dopamine that is needed for you to move when you want to move and not move when you don't want to move. Okay? Giving you at least the motor symptoms of Parkinson disease. With this, it's not that the medication stops working, it's just that you need more dopamine to help replace the dopamine that's being lost. However, the dopamine that you are taking or levodopa that you're taking orally is not going to be released as consistently as it is in your brain on demand and shut off when you don't need it. Hence the reason we get more motor fluctuations. Also, potential side effects in the medication like orthostatic hypertension, hallucinations, impulse control disorders. Because you're having to take more escalating doses, those side effects can become more prominent and also lead us to have to balance between the side effects and the medication itself. So, it's not that the medication does not work, your body needs more of it. Some people will say, oh, well, I want to wait, and I say, that's completely fine. However, my cutoff is basically saying, if you are finding that you, as the person who's afflicted is not able to get up in the morning like you want to, you're avoiding going to walk your dog or working in your garden, you know, because you feel stiff and feel slow; you're avoiding, you know, going out to the community, having lunch with your friends or your family because you're embarrassed by your tremor; this is something that is keeping you from living your life. And that's the time that we need to strongly consider starting the medications. So, a person afflicted will accumulate deficits. However, it's how much the deficits are going to affect you. So, if it's really affecting your life, we have tools and ways to help mitigate that. Dr Nevel: Yeah, absolutely. Are there any aspects of Parkinson disease management that you feel are maybe underrecognized or perhaps underutilized? In other words, you know, are there things that we the listeners should be maybe more aware of or think about offering or recommending to our patients that you think maybe aren't as much as they could be? Dr Rawls: I will say the nonmotor symptoms---in particular the neuropsychiatric symptoms with the anxiety and depression, usually later on disease process but also can be earlier as well---I think that is going to be something that is recognized but maybe undertreated in a lot of our patient population. I think part of that is also the fluctuations in dopamine that are occurring naturally in the...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431415
info_outline
August 2025 Movement Disorders Issue With Dr. Michael Okun
07/30/2025
August 2025 Movement Disorders Issue With Dr. Michael Okun
In this episode, Lyell K. Jones Jr, MD, FAAN, speaks with Michael S. Okun, MD, FAAN, who served as the guest editor of the August 2025 Movement Disorders issue. They provide a preview of the issue, which publishes on August 1, 2025. Dr. Jones is the editor-in-chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology® and is a professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Okun is the director at Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases and distinguished professor of neurology at University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida. Additional Resources Read the issue: Subscribe to Continuum®: Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: Our ability to move through the world is one of the essential functions of our nervous system. Gross movements like walking ranging down to fine movements with our eyes and our hands, our ability to create and coordinate movement is something many of us take for granted. So what do we do when those movements stop working as we intend? Today I have the opportunity to speak with one of the world's leading experts on movement disorders, Dr Michael Okun, about the latest issue of Continuum on Movement Disorders. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about subscribing to the journal, listening to verbatim recordings of the articles, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyle Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. Today, I'm interviewing Dr Michael Okun, who is Continuum's guest editor for our latest issue on movement disorders. Dr Okun is the Adelaide Lackner Distinguished Professor of Neurology at the University of Florida in Gainesville, where he's also the director of the Norman Fixel Institute for Neurological Diseases. Dr Okun, welcome, and thank you for joining us today. Why don't you introduce yourselves to our listeners? Dr Okun: It's great to be here today. And I'm a neurologist. Everybody who knows me knows I'm pretty simple. I believe the patient's the sun and we should always orbit around the person with disease, and so that's how I look at my practice. And I know we always participate in a lot of research, and I've got a research lab and all those things. But to me, it's always the patients and the families first. So, it'll be great to have that discussion today. Dr Jones: Yeah, thank you for that, Dr Oaken. Obviously, movement disorders is a huge part of our field of neurology. There are many highly prevalent conditions that fit into this category that most of our listeners will be familiar with: idiopathic Parkinson's disease, essential tremor, tic disorders and so on. And having worked with trainees for a long time, it's one of the areas that I see a lot of trainees gravitate to movement disorders. And I think it's in part because of the prevalence; I think it's in part because of the diversity of the specialty with treatment options and DBS and Botox. But it's also the centrality of the neurologic exam, right? That's- the clinical examination of the patient is so fundamental. And we'll cover a lot of topics today with some questions that I have for you about biomarkers and new developments in the field. But is that your sense too, that people are drawn to just the old-fashioned, essential focus on the neurologic encounter and the neurologic exam? Dr Okun: I believe that is one of the draws to the field of movement. I think that you have neurologists from all over the world that are really interested and fascinated with what things look like. And when you see something that's a little bit, you know, off the normal road or off the normal beaten path… and we are always curious. And so, I got into movement disorders, I think, accidentally; I think even as a child, I was looking at people who had abnormal movements and tremors and I was very fascinated as to why those things happened and what's going on in the brain. And, you know, what are the symptoms and the signs. And then later on, even as my own career developed, that black bag was so great as a neurologist. I mean, it makes us so much more powerful than any of the other clinicians---at least in my biased opinion---out on the wards and out in the clinic. And, you know, knowing the signs and the symptoms, knowing how to do a neurological examination and really walking through the phenomenology, what people look like, you know, which is different than the geno- you know, the genotypes, what the genes are. What people look like is so much more important as clinicians. And so, I think that movement disorders is just the specialty for that, at least in my opinion. Dr Jones: And it helps bring it back to the patient. And that's something that I saw coming through the articles in this issue. And let's get right to it. You've had a chance to review all these articles on all these different topics across the entire field of movement disorders. As you look at that survey of the field, Dr Okun, what do you think is the most exciting recent development for patients with movement disorders? Dr Okun: I think that when you look across all of the different specialties, what you're seeing is a shift. And the shift is that, you know, a lot of people used to talk in our generation about neurology being one of these “diagnose and adios” specialties. You make the diagnosis and there's nothing that you can do, you know, about these diseases. And boy, that has changed. I mean, we have really blown it out of the water. And when you look at the topics and what people are writing about now and the Continuum issue, and we compare that the last several Continuum issues on movement disorders, we just keep accumulating a knowledge base about what these things look like and how we can treat them. And when we start thinking about, you know, all of the emergence of the autoimmune disorders and identifying the right one and getting something that's quite treatable. Back in my day, and in your day, Lyle, we saw these things and we didn't know what they were. And now we have antibodies, now we can identify them, we can pin them down, and we can treat many of them and really change people's lives. And so, I'm really impressed at what I see in changes in identification of autoimmune disorders, of channelopathies and some of the more rare things, but I'm also impressed with just the fundamental principles of how we're teaching people to be better clinicians in diseases like Parkinson’s, Huntington's, ataxia, and Tourette. And so, my enthusiasm for this issue of Continuum is both on, you know, the cutting edge of what we're seeing based on the identification on our exams, what we can do for these people, but also the emergence of how we're shifting and providing much better care across a continuum for folks with basal ganglia diseases. Dr Jones: Yeah, I appreciate that perspective, Dr Okun. One of the common themes that I saw in the issue was with these new developments, right, when you have new tools like new diagnostic biomarker tools, is the question of if and when and how to integrate those into daily clinical practice, right? So, we've had imaging biomarkers for a while, DAT scans, etc. For patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease, one of the things that I hear a lot of discussion and controversy about are the seed amplification assays as diagnostic biomarkers. What can you tell us about those? Are those ready for routine clinical use yet? Dr Okun: I think the main bottom-line point for folks that are out there trying to practice neurology, either in general clinics or even in specialty clinics, is to know that there is this movement toward, can we biologically classify a disease? One of the things that has, you know, really accelerated that effort has been the development of these seed amplification assays, which---in short for people who are listening---are basically, we “shake and bake” these things. You know? We shake them for like 20 hours and we use these prionlike proteins, and we learn from diseases like prion disease how to kind of tag these things and then see, do they have degenerative properties? And in the case of Parkinson's disease, we're able to do this with synuclein. That is the idea of a seed amplification assay. We're able to use this to see, hey, is there synuclein present or not in this sample? And people are looking at things like cerebrospinal fluid, they're looking at things like blood and saliva, and they're finding it. The challenge here is that, remember- and one of the things that's great about this issue of Continuum is, remember, there are a whole bunch of different synucleinopathies. So, Dr Jones, it isn't just Parkinson's disease. So, you've got Parkinson's disease, you've got Lewy body, you know, and dementia with Lewy bodies. You've got, you know, multiple system atrophy is within that synucleinopathy, you know, group primary autonomic failure… so not just Parkinson's disease. And so, I think we have to tap the brakes as clinicians and just say, we are where we are. We are moving in that direction. And remember that a seed amplification assay gives you some information, but it doesn't give you all the information. It doesn't forgive you looking at a person over time, examining them in your clinic, seeing how they progress, seeing their response to dopamine- and by the way, several of these genes that are associated with Parkinson; and there's, you know, less than 20% of Parkinson is genetic, but several of these genes, in a solid third---and in some cases, in some series, even more---miss the synuclein assay, misses, you know, the presence of a disease like Parkinson's disease. And so, we have to be careful in how we interpret it. And I think we're more likely to see over time a gemish: we're going to smush together all this information. We're going to get better with MRIs. And so, we're actually doing much better with MRIs and AI-based intelligence. We've got DAT scans, we've got synuclein assays. But more than anything, everybody listening out there, you can still examine the person and examine them over time and see how they do over time and see how they do with dopamine. And that is still a really, really solid way to do this. The synuclein assays are probably going to be ready for prime time more in choosing and enriching clinical trials populations first. And you know, we're probably 5, 10 years behind where Alzheimer's is right now. So, we'll get there at some point, but it's not going to be a silver bullet. I think we're looking at these are going to be things that are going to be interpreted in the context for a clinician of our examination and in the context of where the field is and what you're trying to use the information for. Dr Jones: Thank you for that. And I think that's the general gestalt I got from the articles and what I hear from my colleagues. And I think we've seen this in other domains of neurology, right? We have the specificity and sensitivity issues with the biomarkers, but we also have the high prevalence of copathology, right? People can have multiple different neurodegenerative problems, and I think it gets back to that clinical context, like you said, following the patient longitudinally. That was a theme that came out in the idiopathic Parkinson disease article. And while we're on Parkinson disease, you know, the first description of that was what, more than two hundred years ago. And I think we're still thinking about the pathophysiology of that disorder. We understand risk factors, and I think many of our listeners would be familiar with those. But as far as the actual cause, you know, there's been discussion in recent years about, is there a role of the gut microbiome? Is this a prionopathic disorder? What's your take on all of that? Dr Okun: Yeah, so it's a great question. It's a super-hot area right now of Parkinson. And I kind of take this, you know, apart in a couple of different ways. First of all, when we think about Parkinson disease, we have to think upstream. Like, what are the cause and causes? Okay? So, Parkinson is not one disease, okay? And even within the genes, there's a bunch of different genes that cause it. But then we have to look and say, well, if that's less than 20% depending on who's counting, then 80% don't have a single piece of DNA that's closely associated with this syndrome. And so, what are we missing with environment and other factors? We need to understand not what happens at the end of the process, not necessarily when synuclein is clumping- and by the way, there's a lot of synuclein in the brains normally, and there's a lot of Tau in people's brains who have Parkinson as well. We don't know what we don't know, Dr Jones. And so when we begin to think about this disease, we've got to look upstream. We've got to start to think, where do things really start? Okay? We've got to stop looking at it as probably a single disease or disorder, and it's a circuit disorder. And then as we begin to develop and follow people along that pathway and continuum, we're going to realize that it's not a one-size-fits-all equation when we're trying to look at Parkinson. By the way, for people listening, we only spend two to three cents out of every dollar on prevention. Wouldn't prevention be the best cure, right? Like, if we were thinking about this disease. And so that's something that we should be, you know, thinking about. And then the other is the Global Burden of Disease study. You know, when we wrote about this in a book called Ending Parkinson's Disease, it looked like Parkinson's was going to double by 2035. The new numbers tell us it's almost double to the level that we expected in 2035 in this last series of numbers. So, it's actually growing much faster. We have to ask why? Why is it growing faster? And then we have lots of folks, and even within these issues here within Continuum, people are beginning to talk about maybe these environmental things that might be blind spots. Is it starting in our nose? Is it starting in our gut? And then we get to the gut question. And the gut question is, if we look at the microbiomes of people with Parkinson, there does seem to be, in a group of folks with Parkinson, a Parkinson microbiome. Not in everyone, but if you look at it in composite, there seems to be some clues there. We see changes in Lactobacillus, we see some bacteria going up that are good, some bacteria going down, you know, that are bad. And we see flipping around, and that can change as we put people on probiotics and we try to do fecal microbiota transplantations- which, by the way, the data so far has not been positive in Parkinson's. Doesn't mean we might not get there at some point, but I think the main point here is that as we move into the AI generation, there are just millions and millions and millions of organisms within your gut. And it's going to take more than just our eyes and just our regular arithmetic. You and I probably know how to do arithmetic really well, but this is, like, going to be a much bigger problem for computers that are way smarter than our brains to start to look and say, well, we see the bacteria is up here. That's a good bacteria, that's a good thing or it's down with this bacteria or this phage or there's a relationship or proportion that's changing. And so, we're not quite there. And so, I always tell people---and you know, we talk about the sum in the issue---microbiomes aren't quite ready for prime time yet. And so be careful, because you could tweak the system and you might actually end up worse than before you started. So, we don't know what we don't know on this issue. Dr Jones: And that's a great point. And one of the themes they're reading between the lines is, we will continue to work on understanding the bio-pathophysiology, but we can't wait until that day to start managing the risk factors and treating patients, which I think is a good point. And if we pivot to treatment here a little bit, you know, one of the exciting areas of movement disorders---and really neurology broadly, I think movement disorders has led the field in many ways---is bioelectronic therapy, or what one of my colleagues taught me is “electroceutical therapy”, which I think is a wonderful term. Dr Okun, when our listeners are hearing about the latest in deep brain stimulation in patients who have movement disorders, what should they know? What are the latest developments in that area with devices? Dr Okun: Yeah. So, they should know that things are moving rapidly in the field of putting electricity into the brain. And we're way past the era where we thought putting a little bit of electricity was snake oil. We know we can actually drive these circuits, and we know that many of these disorders---and actually, probably all of the disorders within this issue of Continuum---are all circuit disorders. And so, you can drive the circuit by modulating the circuit. And it's turned out to be quite robust with therapies like deep brain stimulation. Now, we're seeing uses of deep brain stimulation across multiple of these disorders now. So, for example, you may think of it in Parkinson's disease, but now we're also seeing people use it to help in cases where you need to palliate very severe and bothersome chorea and Huntington's disease, we're seeing it move along in Tourette syndrome. We of course have seen this for various hyperkinetic disorders and dystonias. And so, the main thing for clinicians to realize when dealing with neuromodulation is, take a deep breath because it can be overwhelming. We have a lot of different devices in the marketplace and no matter how many different devices we have in the marketplace, the most important thing is that we get the leads. You know, where we're stimulating into the right location. It's like real estate: location, location, location, whether you've got a lead that can steer left, right, up, down and do all of these things. Second, if you're feeling overwhelmed because there are so many devices and so many settings, especially as we put these leads in and they have all sorts of different, you know, nodes on them and you can steer this way and that way, you are not alone. Everybody is feeling that way now. And we're beginning to see AI solutions to that that are going to merge together with imaging, and then we're moving toward an era of, you know, should I say things like robotic programming, where it's going to be actually so complicated as we move forward that we're going to have to automate these systems. There's no way to get this and scale this for all of the locales within the United States, but within the entire world of people that need these types of devices and these therapies. And so, it's moving rapidly. It's overwhelming. The most important thing is choosing the right person. Okay? For this, with multidisciplinary teams, getting the lead in the right place. And then all these other little bells and whistles, they're like sculpting. So, if you think of a sculpture, you kind of get that sculpture almost there. You know, those little adds are helping to maybe make the eyes come out a little more or the facial expression a little bit better. There's little bits of sculpting. But if you're feeling overwhelmed by it, everybody is. And then also remember that we're starting to move towards some trials here that are in their early stages. And a lot of times when we start, we need more failures to get to our successes. So, we're seeing trials of people looking at, like, oligo therapies and protein therapies. We're seeing CRISPR gene therapies in the laboratory....
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/37431390
info_outline
BONUS EPISODE: Bridging the Gap Between Brain Health Guidelines and Real-world Implementation With Drs. Daniel Correa and Rana Said
07/26/2025
BONUS EPISODE: Bridging the Gap Between Brain Health Guidelines and Real-world Implementation With Drs. Daniel Correa and Rana Said
With the increase in the public’s attention to all aspects of brain health, neurologists need to understand their role in raising awareness, advocating for preventive strategies, and promoting brain health for all. To achieve brain health equity, neurologists must integrate culturally sensitive care approaches, develop adapted assessment tools, improve professional and public educational materials, and continually innovate interventions to meet the diverse needs of our communities. In this BONUS episode, Casey Albin, MD, speaks with Daniel José Correa, MD, MSc, FAAN and Rana R. Said, MD, FAAN, coauthors of the article “Bridging the Gap Between Brain Health Guidelines and Real-world Implementation” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Albin is a Continuum® Audio interviewer, associate editor of media engagement, and an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Correa is the associate dean for community engagement and outreach and an associate professor of neurology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine Division of Clinical Neurophysiology in the Saul Korey Department of Neurology at the Montefiore Medical Center, New York, New York. Dr. Said is a professor of pediatrics and neurology, the director of education, and an associate clinical chief in the division of pediatric neurology at the University of Texas Southwest Medical Center in Dallas, Texas. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guests: , Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. This exclusive Continuum Audio interview is available only to you, our subscribers. We hope you enjoy it. Thank you for listening. Dr Albin: Hi all, this is Dr Casey Albin. Today I'm interviewing Dr Daniel Correa and Dr Rana Said about their article on bridging the gap between brain health guidelines and real-world implementation, which they wrote with Dr Justin Jordan. This article appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Thank you both so much for joining us. I'd love to just start by having you guys introduce yourselves to our listeners. Rana, do you mind going first? Dr Said: Yeah, sure. Thanks, Casey. So, my name is Rana Said. I'm a professor of pediatrics and neurology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. Most of my practice is pediatric epilepsy. I'm also the associate clinical chief and the director of education for our division. And in my newer role, I am the vice chair of the Brain Health Committee for the American Academy of Neurology. Dr Albin: Absolutely. So just the right person to talk about this. And Daniel, some of our listeners may know you already from the Brain and Life podcast, but please introduce yourself again. Dr Correa: Thank you so much, Casey for including us and then highlighting this article. So yes, as you said, I'm the editor and the cohost for the Brain and Life podcast. I do also work with Rana and all the great members of the Brain Health Initiative and committee within the AAN, but in my day-to-day at my institution, I'm an associate professor of neurology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Montefiore Health System. I do a mix of general neurology and epilepsy and with a portion of my time, I also work as an associate Dean at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, supporting students and trainees with community engagement and outreach activities. Dr Albin: Excellent. Thank you guys both so much for taking the time to be here. You know, brain health has really become this core mission of the AAN. Many listeners probably know that it's actually even part of the AAN’s mission statement, which is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all. And I think a lot of us have this kind of, like, vague idea about what brain health is, but I'd love to just start by having a shared mental model. So, Rana, can you tell us what do you mean when you talk about brain health? Dr Said: Yeah, thanks for asking that question. And, you know, even as a group, we really took quite a while to solidify, like, what does that even mean? Really, the concept is that we're shifting from a disease-focused model, which we see whatever disorder comes in our doors, to a preventative approach, recognizing that there's a tremendous interconnectedness between our physical health, our mental health, cognitive and social health, you know, maintaining our optimal brain function. And another very important part of this is that it's across the entire lifespan. So hopefully that sort of solidifies how we are thinking about brain health. Dr Albin: Right. Daniel, anything else to add to that? Dr Correa: One thing I've really liked about this, you know, the evolution of the 2023 definition from the AAN is its highlight on it being a continuous state. We're not only just talking about prevention of injury and a neurologic condition, but then really optimizing our own health and our ability to engage in our communities afterwards, and that there's always an opportunity for improvement of our brain health. Dr Albin: I love that. And I really felt like in this article, you walked us through some tangible pillars that support the development and maintenance of this lifelong process of maintaining and developing brain health. And so, Daniel, I was wondering, you know, we could take probably the entire time just to talk about the five pillars that support brain health. But can you give us a pretty brief overview of what those are that you outlined in this article? Dr Correa: I mean, this was one of the biggest challenges and really bundling all the possibilities and the evidence that's out there and just getting a sense of practical movement forward. So, there are many organizations and groups out there that have formed pillars, whether we're calling them seven or eight, you know, the exact number can vary, but just to have something to stand on and move forward. We've bundled one of them as physical and sleep health. So really encouraging towards levels of activity and not taking it as, oh, that there's a set- you know, there are recommendations out there for amount of activity, but really looking at, can we challenge people to just start growing and moving forward at their current ability? Can we challenge people to look at their sleep health, see if there's an aspect to improve, and then reassess with time? We particularly highlight the importance of mental health, whether it's before a neurologic condition or a brain injury occurs or addressing the mental health comorbidities that may come along with neurologic conditions. Then there's of course the thing that everyone thinks about, I think, with brain health in terms of is cognitive health. And you know, I think that's the first place that really enters either our own minds or as we are observers of our elder individuals in our family. And more and more there has been the highlight on the need for social interconnectedness, community purpose. And this is what we include as a pillar of social health. And then across all types of neurologic potential injuries is really focusing on the area of brain injury. And so, I think the area that we've often been focused as neurologists, but also thinking of both the prevention along with the management of the condition or the injury after it occurs. Dr Albin: Rana, anything else to add to that? That’s a fantastic overview. Dr Said: Daniel, thank you for- I mean, you just set it up so beautifully. I think the other thing that maybe would be important for people to understand is that as we're talking through a lot of these, these are individual. These sound like very individual-basis factors. But as part of the full conversation, we also have to understand that there are some factors that are not based on the individual, and then that leads to some of the other initiatives that we'll be talking about at the community and policy levels. So, for example, if an individual is living in an area with high air pollution. Yes, we want them to be healthy and exercise and sleep, but how do we modify those factors? What about lead leaching from our aging pipes or even infectious diseases? So, I think that outside of our pillars, this is sort of the next step is to understand what is also at large in our communities. Dr Albin: That's a really awesome point. I love that the article really does shine through and that there are these individual factors, and then there there's social factors, there’s policy factors. I want to start just with that individual because I think so many of our patients probably know, like, stress management, exercise, sleep, all of that stuff is really important. But when I was reading your article, what was not so obvious to me was, what's the role that we as neurologists should play in advocating? And really more importantly, like, how should we do that? And again, it struck me that there are these kind of two issues at play. And one is that what Daniel was saying that, you know, a lot of our patients are coming because they have a problem, right? We are used to operating in this disease-based care, and there's just limited time, competing clinical demands. If they're not coming to talk about prevention, how do we bring that in? And so Rana, maybe I'll start with you just for that question, you know, for the patients who are seeing us with a disease complaint or they're coming for the management of a problem, how are you organizing this at the bedside to kind of factor in a little bit about that preventative brain health? Dr Said: You know, I think the most important thing at the bedside is, one, really identifying the modifiable risk factors. These have been well studied, we understand them. Hypertension, diabetes, smoking, weight management. And we know that these definitely are correlative. So is it our role just to talk about stroke, or should we talk about, how are you managing your blood pressure? Health education, if there was one major cornerstone, is elevating health literacy for everyone and understanding that patients value clear and concise information about brain health, about modifiable risk factors. And the corollary to that, of course, are what are the resources and services? I completely understand---I'm a practicing clinician---the constraints that we have at the bedside, be it in the hospital or in our clinics. And so being the source of information, how are we referring our families and individuals to social workers, community health worker support, and really partnering with them, food banks, injury prevention programs, patient advocacy organizations? I think those are really ways that we can meet the impacts that we're looking at the bedside that can feel very tangible and practical. Dr Albin: That's really excellent advice. And so, I'd like to ask a follow-up question. With your knowledge of this, trying to get more multidisciplinary buy-in from your clinic so that you really have the support to get these services that are so critically important. And how do you do that? Dr Said: Yeah, I think it's, one, being a champion. So, what does a champion mean? It means that somebody has to decide this is really important. And I think we all realize that we're not the only ones in the room who care about this. We're all in this, and we all care about it. But how do we champion it and carry it through? And so that's the first. Second you find your partnerships: your social workers, your case managers, your other colleagues. And then what is the first-level entry thing that you can do? So for example, I'm a pediatric epileptologist. One of the things we know is that in pediatric epilepsy, depression and anxiety are very strong comorbidities. So, before we get to the point where a child is in distress, every single one of our epilepsy patients who walks in the door over the age of twelve has an age-appropriate screener that is given to them in both English and Spanish. And we assess it and we determine stratifying risk. And then we have our social workers on the back end and we decide, is this a child who needs resources? Is this a child who needs to be walked to the emergency room, escorted? And anything in between. And I think that that was a just a very tangible example of, every single person can do this and ask about it. And through the development of dot phrases and clear protocols, it works really well. Dr Albin: I love that, the way that you're just being mindful. At every step of the way, we can help people towards this lifelong brain health. And Daniel, you work with an adult population. So I wonder, what are your tips for bringing this to a different patient population? Dr Correa: Well, I think---adult or child---one thing that we often are aware of with so many of the other things that we're doing in bedside or clinic room counseling, but we don't necessarily think of in this context of brain health, is, remember all the people in the room. So, at the bedside, whether it's in the ICU, discharge counseling, the initial admission, the whole family is often involved and really concerned about the active issue. But you can look for opportunities- we often try to counsel and support families about the importance of their own sleep and rest and highlighting it not just as being there for their family member, but highlighting it to them as a measure of their own improvement of their brain health. So, looking at ways where, one, I try to find, is there something I can do to support and educate the whole family about their brain health? And then- and with an epilepsy, or in many other situations, I try to look for one comorbidity that might be a pillar of brain health to address that maybe I wasn't already thinking. And then I consider, is there an additional thing that they wouldn't naturally connect to their epilepsy or their headaches that I can bring in for them to work on? You know, we can't often give people twelve different things to work on, and they’d just feel like, okay like, you have no realistic understanding of my life. But if we can just highlight on one, and remind them that there can be many more ways to improve their health and to follow up either with us as their neurologist or their future primary care doctors to address those additional needs. Again, I would really highlight the importance of a multidisciplinary approach and looking for opportunities. We've too often, I feel, relied on primary care as being the first line for addressing unmet social health needs. We know that so many people, once they have a neurologic condition or the potential, even, of a neurologic condition, they're concerned about dementia or something, they may view us, as their neurologist, as their most important provider. And if they don't have the resource of time and money to show up at other doctors, we may be the first one they're coming to. And so, tapping into your institution's resources and finding out, are there things that are available to the primary care services that for some reason we're not able to get on the inpatient side or the outpatient side? Referring to social workers and care workers and showing that our patients have an independent need, that they're not somehow getting captured by the primary care doctors. Dr Albin: I really love that. I think that we- just being more invested and just being ready to step into that role is really important. I was noticing in this article, you really call that being a brain health ambassador, being really mindful, and I will direct all of our listeners to Figure 3, which really captures what practitioners can do both at the bedside, within their local community, and even at the professional society level, to really advocate for policies that promote brain wellness. Rana, at the very beginning of this conversation, you noted, you know, this is not just an individual problem. This really is something that is a component of our policy and the structure of our local communities. I really loved in the article, there's a humility that this cannot be just a person-by-person bedside approach, that this is a little bit determined by the social determinants of health. And so, Rana, can you walk us through a little bit of what are the social determinants of health, and why are these so crucially important when we think about brain health for all? Dr Said: Yeah, social determinants of health are a really key factor that it looks at, what are the health factors that are environmental; for example, that are not directly like what your blood pressure is, what, you know, what your BMI is, that definitely impact our health outcomes. So, these include environmental things like where people are born, where they live, where they learn, work, play, worship, and age. It encompasses factors like your socioeconomic status, your education, the neighborhoods where you are living, definitely healthcare access. And then all of this is in a social and community context. We know that the impact of social determinants of health on brain health are profound for the entire lifespan and that- so, for example, if someone is from a disadvantaged background or that leads to chronic stress, they can have limited access to healthcare. They can have greater risk of exposure to, let's say, environmental toxins, and all of that will shape how their brain health is. Violence, for example. And so, as we think about how we're going to target and enhance brain health, we really have to understand that these are vulnerable populations, special high-risk populations, that often have a disproportionate burden of neurologic disorders. And by identifying them and then developing targeted interventions, it promotes health equity. And it really has to be done in looking at culturally- ethnocultural-sensitive healthcare education resources, thinking about culturally sensitive or adaptive assessment tools that work for different populations so that these guidelines that we have, that we've already identified as being so valuable, can be equitably applied, which is one crucial component of reducing brain health risk factors. And lastly, at the neighborhood level, this is where we really rely on our partnerships with community partners who really understand their constituents and they understand how to have the special conversations, how to enhance brain health through resource utilization. And so, this is another plug for policy and resources. Dr Albin: I love that. And thinking about the neighborhood and the policy levels and all the things that we have to do. Daniel, I'd like to ask you, is there anything else you would add? Dr Correa: Yeah, you know, so I really wanted to come back to this thing is that often and unfortunately, in the beginning understanding of social determinants of health, they're thought of as a positive or a negative factor, and often really negative. These are just facts. They're aspects about our community, our society, and some of them may be at the individual level. They're not at fault of any individual or community, or even our society. They're just the realities. And when someone has a factor that may predict a health disparity or an unmet social need---I wanted to come back to that concept and that term---one or two positive factors that are social determinants of health for that individual are unmet social needs. It's a point of promise. It's a potential to be addressed. And seeking ways to connect them with community services, social work, caregivers, these are ways where- that we can remove a barrier to, so that the possibility of the recommendations that we're used to doing,...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660520
info_outline
Childhood-onset Hydrocephalus With Dr. Shenandoah Robinson
07/23/2025
Childhood-onset Hydrocephalus With Dr. Shenandoah Robinson
Childhood-onset hydrocephalus encompasses a wide range of disorders with varying clinical implications. There are numerous causes of symptomatic hydrocephalus in neonates, infants, and children, and each predicts the typical clinical course across the lifespan. Etiology and age of onset impact the lifelong management of individuals living with childhood-onset hydrocephalus. In this episode, Casey Albin, MD, speaks with Shenandoah Robinson, MD, FAANS, FAAP, FACS, author of the article “Childhood-onset Hydrocephalus” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Albin is a Continuum® Audio interviewer, associate editor of media engagement, and an assistant professor of neurology and neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Robinson is a professor of neurosurgery, neurology, and pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Albin: Hi, this is Dr Casey Albin. Today I'm interviewing Dr Shenandoah Robinson about her article on childhood onset hydrocephalus, which appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Dr Robinson, thank you so much for being here. Welcome to the podcast. I'd love to start by just having you briefly introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Robinson: I'm a pediatric neurosurgeon at Johns Hopkins, and I'm very fortunate to care for kids and children from the neonatal intensive care unit all the way up through young adulthood. And I have a strong interest in developing better treatments for hydrocephalus. Dr Albin: Absolutely. And this was a great article because I really do think that understanding how children with hydrocephalus are treated really does inform how we can care for them throughout the continuum of their lifespan. You know, I was shocked in reading your article about the scope of the problem for childhood onset hydrocephalus. Can you walk our listeners through what are the most common reasons why CSF diversion is needed in the pediatric population? Dr Robinson: For the United States, and Canada too, the most common reasons are spina bifida---so, a baby that's born with a myelomeningocele and then develops associated hydrocephalus---and then about equally as common is posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus of prematurity, congenital causes such as from aquaductal stenosis, and other genetic causes are less common. And then we also have kids that develop hydrocephalus after trauma or meningitis or tumors or other sort of acquired problems during childhood. Dr Albin: So, it's a really diverse and sort of heterogeneous causes that across sort of the, you know, the neonatal period all the way to, you know, young adulthood. And I'm sure that those etiologies really shift based on sort of the subgroup population that you're talking about. Dr Robinson: Yes, they definitely shift over time. Fortunately for our kids that are born with problems that raise concerns, such as myelomeningocele or if they're born preterm, they sort of declare themselves by the time they're a year old. So, if you're an adult provider, they should have defined themselves and it's unlikely that they will suddenly develop hydrocephalus as a teenager or older adult. Dr Albin: Totally makes sense. I think many of the listeners to this podcast are adult neurologists who are probably very familiar with external ventriculostomies for temporary CSF diversion, and with the more permanent ventricular peritoneal shines or ventricular atrial or plural shines that are needed when there's the need for permanent diversion. But you described in your article two procedures that provide temporary CSF diversion that I think many of our listeners are probably not as familiar with, which is the ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts. Can you briefly describe what those procedures provide? Who are the candidates for them? And then what complications neurologists may need to think about if they're consulted for comanagement in one of these complex patients? Dr Robinson: Well, the good thing is that if as an adult neurologist you encounter someone with, you know, residual tubing from one of these procedures, you are unlikely to need to do anything about it. So, we put in ventricular access device or ventriculosubgaleal shunts, usually in newborns or infants. And sometimes when they no longer need the device, we just leave it in because that saves them an extra surgery. So, if you encounter one later on, it's most likely you won't need to do anything. Often if the baby goes on to show that they need a permanent shunt, we go ahead and put in that permanent shunt. We may or may not go back and take out the reservoir or the subgaleal shunt. The reservoir and subgaleal shunts are often put in the frontal location. Sometimes we'll put the permanent shunt in the occipital location and just leave the residual tubing there. So, you're very unlikely to need to intervene with a reservoir or subgaleal shunt if you encounter an older child or adult with that left in. We use these in the small babies because the external ventricular drains that we're very familiar with have a very high complication rate in this population. In the adult ICU, you often see these, and maybe there's, you know, a few percent risk of infection. It actually heads into 20 to 25% in our preterm infants and other newborns that require one of these devices for drainage. So, we try not to use external ventricular drains like we use in older patients. We use the internalized device: either the ventricular reservoir with a little area for us to tap every day, every other day; or the ventriculosubgaleal shunt, which diverts the spinal fluid to a pocket in the scalp. So, we use these in preterm infants that are too tiny for a permanent shunt. And for some of our babies that are born, for example, with an omphalocele, that we can't use their peritoneal cavity and so we need some temporizing device to manage their CSF. Dr Albin: Totally makes sense. And so just to clarify, I mean, this is a tube that's placed into the ventricles of the brain and then it's tunneled into the subgaleal space and the collection, the CSF, just builds up there, like? Dr Robinson: Yeah. Dr Albin: And over time either, you know, the baby will learn how to account for that extra CSF, and then I guess it's just reabsorbed? Dr Robinson: Yeah. When it's present, though, it looks like maybe, I don't know if you're familiar with like a tissue expander. There is this bubble of fluid under the scalp, but it's prominent, it can be several centimeters in diameter. Dr Albin: Wow, that's just absolutely fascinating. And I don't think I've ever had the opportunity to see this in clinical practice. I've really learned quite a bit about this. I assume that these children are going to go on to get some sort of permanent diversion. And then, you know, over time, those permanent shunts do create a lot of problems. And so, I was hoping you could kind of walk us through, you know, what are some of the things that you're seeing that you're concerned about? And then if you've just inherited a patient who had a shunt placed at, say, a different institution, how do you go about figuring out what kind of shunt it is and if they're still dependent on it? Dr Robinson: There's a few things that, fortunately, technology is helping with. So, it is much easier now for patients to get their images uploaded to image-sharing software, and then we can download their images into our institutional software, which is very helpful. Another option is that we are strongly encouraging our families to use a app such as HydroAssist that's available from the Hydrocephalus Association. So that's an app that goes on your phone, and you can upload the images from an MRI or a CT scan or x-rays from a shunt series. And then that you can take if you're traveling and you have to go to emergency department or you're establishing care with a new provider, you can have your information right there and not be under stress to remember it. It also has areas so you can record the type of valve. And all of our valves have pluses and minuses, they all tend to malfunction a little bit. And they can be particularly helpful with different types of hydrocephalus. I really doubt that we're going to narrow down from the fifteen or so valves we have access to now. And so, recording your valve type, the manufacturer as well as the setting, is very helpful when you're transferring care or if you're traveling and then have to, unfortunately, stop in the emergency department. Dr Albin: Yeah, I thought that was a really great pearl that, like, families now are empowered to sort of take control of understanding sort of the devices that they have, the settings that they're using. And what an incredible thing for providers who are going to care for these patients who, you know, unfortunately do end up in centers that are not their primary center. The other challenge that I find… I practice as a neurointensivist, and sometimes patients come in and they have a history of being shunt dependent and they present with a neurologic change. And I think that we as neurologists can be a little quick to blame the shunt and want the shunt to be tapped. And I was really struck in reading this article about the complexity of shunt taps. And I was hoping, you know, can you kind of walk us through what's involved and maybe why we should have a little bit of a higher threshold before just saying, ah, just have the neurosurgeons tap the shunt. Like, it's not that straightforward. Dr Robinson: And it may depend on the population you're caring for. So, when I was at a different institution, we actually published that there's about a 5% complication rate from shunt taps. And that may be- that was in pediatric patients. And again, that may be population dependent, but you can introduce infection to a perfectly clean shunt by doing a shunt tap. You can also cause an acute shunt malfunction. So that's why we tend to prefer that only neurosurgeons are doing shunt taps for evaluation of a shunt malfunction. There are times that, for example, our patients who are getting intrathecal chemotherapy or something have a CSF access device like an Ommaya reservoir, and other providers may tap that reservoir to instill medicine. But that's different than an evaluation, like, you're talking about somebody with a neurological change. And so, it is possible that if somebody has small ventricles or something, if you tap that shunt, you can take a marginally functioning shunt and turn it into an acute proximal malfunction, which is an emergency. Dr Albin: Absolutely. I think that's a fantastic pearl for us to take away from this. It's just that heightened level. And kind of on the flip side of that, you know, and I really- I do feel for us when we're trying to kind of, you know, make a case that it's, it's not the shunt. Many of our shunted patients also have a lot of neurologic complexity, which I think you really talked upon in this article. I mean, these are patients who have developmental cognitive delays and that they have epilepsy and that they're at risk for, you know, complications from prematurity, since that's a very common reason that patients are getting shunts. But from your experience as a neurosurgeon, what are some of the features that make you particularly concerned about shnut malfunction? And how do you sort of evaluate these patients when they come in with that altered mental status? Dr Robinson: It is challenging, especially for our patients that have, you know, some intellectual delay or other difficulties that make it hard for them to give an accurate history. Problem is, if they're sick and lethargic, they may not remember the symptoms that they had when they were sick. But sometimes there's hopefully there's a family member present that does remember and can say, oh, no, this is what they look like when they have a viral illness. And this is different from when they have the shot malfunction, which was projectile emesis, not associated with a fever. It's rare to have a fever with a shunt malfunction, although shunt infection often presents with malfunction. So, it's not completely exclusionary. We often look at the imaging, but it's taking the whole picture together. Some of the common other diagnoses we see are severe constipation that can decrease the drainage from the shunt and even cause papilledema in some people. So, we look at that as well on the shunt series. It's very important to have the shunt series if you're concerned about shunt malfunction or- the shunt tubing is good. It tends to last maybe 20to 25 years before it starts to degrade. And so, you may have had a functioning shunt for decades and it worked well and you're very dependent on it, and then it breaks and you become ill. But on the flip side, we have patients that have had a broken shunt for years, they just didn't know about it. And we don't want to jump in and operate on them and then cause complexities. And so, it is a challenge to sort out. The simplest thing is obviously if they come in and their ventricles are significantly larger, and that goes along with a several-hour or a couple-day deterioration, that's a little more clear-cut. Dr Albin: Absolutely. And you talked about this shunt series. What other imaging- and, sort of maybe walk us through, what's involved in a shunt series, what are you looking at? And then what other imaging is sort of your preferred method for evaluating these patients? Dr Robinson: In adult patients, the shunt series is the x-ray from the entire shunt. And so, if they have an atrial shunt, that would be skull x-ray plus a chest x-ray; or the shunt ends in the perineal cavity, it goes to the perineum. And we're looking for continuity. We're looking for the- sometimes as people grow and age, the ventricular catheter can pull out of the ventricle. So, we're looking to make sure that the ventricular catheter is in an optimal position relative to the skull. We can also look at the valve setting to see the type of valve. So, that can also be helpful as well. And then in terms of additional imaging, a CT scan or an MRI is helpful. If you don't know what type of valve they have, they should not, ideally, go in the MRI scanner. We like to know what their setting is before they go in the MRI because we're going to have to reset the valve after they come out of the MRI if it's a programmable valve. Dr Albin: This is fantastic. I've heard several pearls. So, one is that with the shunt series, which, am I correct in understanding those are just plain X-rays? Dr Robinson: Yes. Dr Albin: Right. Then we can look for constipation, and that might be actually something really serious in a pediatric patient that could clue us in that they could actually be developing hydrocephalus or increased ICP just because of the abdominal pressure. And then that we need to be mindful of what are the stunt settings before we expose anyone to the MRI machine. Is that two good takeaways from all of this? Dr Robinson: Yes. And it's very rare that there'll be an MRI tech that will allow a patient with a valve in the MRI without knowing what it is. So, they have their job security that way. But yeah, if you're not sure, just go ahead and get the CT. Obviously, in our younger kids, we're trying to avoid CT scans. But if you're weighing off trying to decide if somebody has a shunt malfunction versus, you know, waiting 12 or 24 hours for an MRI, go ahead and get the CT. Dr Albin: Absolutely. I love it. Those are things I'm going to take with me for this. I have one more question about these shunts. So, every now and then, and I think you started to touch on this, we will get a shunt series and we'll see that the catheter is fractured. Do the patients develop little- like, a tract that continues to allow diversion even though the catheter is fractured? Dr Robinson: Yes. So, they can develop scar tissue around, and some people have more scar tissue than others. You'll even see that sometimes, say, the catheter has fractured and we'll take out that old fractured tubing and put in new tubing on the other side. But if you go and palpate their neck or chest, you'll still feel that tract is there because it calcifies along the tract. Some patients drain through that calcified tract for weeks or months without symptoms, and then it can occlude off. So, we don't consider it a reliable pathway. It's also not a reliable pathway if you're positioned prone in the OR. So some of our orthopedic colleagues, for example, if they go to do a spine fusion, we like to confirm that the shunt is working before you undergo that long anesthesia, but also that you're going to be positioned prone and you could potentially- you know, the pressure could occlude that track that normally is open. Dr Albin: This is fantastic. I feel like I've gotten everything I've ever wanted to know about shunts and all of their complications in this, which is, you know, this is really difficult. And I think that because we are not trained to put these in, sometimes we see them and we just say, oh, it's fractured that must be a malfunction. But it's good to know that sometimes those patients can drain through, you know, a sort of scarred-down tract, but that it may not be nearly as reliable as when they have the tubing in place. Another really good thing that I'm going to put in my back pocket for the next time I see a patient with a potential shunt malfunction. Dr Robinson: And we do have some patients that the tubing is fractured years ago and they don't need it repaired, and that totally can be challenging when they then transfer to your practice for follow-up care. We tend to follow those patients very closely, both our clinic visits as well as having them seen by ophthalmology. So, there are teenagers and young adults out there that have… their own system has recovered and they are no longer shunt-dependent; and they may have a broken shunt and not actually be using that track, but they usually have had fairly intensive follow up to prove that they're not shunt-dependent. And we still have a healthy respect there that, you know, if they start to get a headache, we're going to take that quite seriously as opposed to, you know, some of our shunt patients, about 10 to 20%, have chronic headaches that are not shunt-related. So, not everybody who has a headache and has a shunt has a shunt malfunction. It's tough. Dr Albin: This is really tough. That actually brings me to sort of the last clinical scenario that I was hoping we could get your perspective on. And I think this would be of great interest to neurologists, especially in the context that these children may develop headaches that have nothing to do with the shunt. I'd like to sort of give you this hypothetical case that I'm a neurologist seeing a patient in clinic and it’s a teenager, maybe a young adult, and they had a shunt placed early in childhood. They've done really well. And they've come to me for management of a new headache. And, you know, as part of this workup, their primary care provider had ordered an MRI. And, you know, I look at the MRI, and I don't think that the ventricles look really enlarged. They don't look overdrained. Is having an MRI that looks pretty okay, is that enough to...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660500
info_outline
Management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus With Dr. Kaisorn Chaichana
07/16/2025
Management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus With Dr. Kaisorn Chaichana
Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is a pathologic condition whereby excess CSF is retained in and around the brain despite normal intracranial pressure. MRI-safe programmable shunt valves allow for fluid drainage adjustment based on patients’ symptoms and radiographic images. Approximately 75% of patients with NPH improve after shunt surgery regardless of shunt type or location. In this episode, Aaron Berkowitz, MD, PhD, FAAN, speaks with Kaisorn L. Chaichana, MD, author of the article “Management of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Berkowitz is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a professor of neurology at the University of California San Francisco in the Department of Neurology in San Francisco, California. Dr. Chaichana is a professor of neurology in the department of neurological surgery at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Berkowitz: This is Dr Aaron Berkowitz, and today I'm interviewing Dr Kaisorn Chaichana about his article on management of normal pressure hydrocephalus, which he wrote with Dr Jeremy Cutsforth-Gregory. The article appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Chaichana: Yeah, thank you for having me. I'm Kaisorn Chaichana. I'm a neurosurgeon at Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. Part of my practice is doing hydrocephalus care, which includes shunts for patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus. Dr Berkowitz: Fantastic. Well, before we get into shunt considerations and NPH specifically, which I know is the focus of your article, I thought it would be a great opportunity for a neurologist to pick a neurosurgeon's brain a bit about shunts. So, to start, can you lay out for us the different types of shunts and shunt procedures, the advantages, disadvantages of each type of shunt, how you think about which shunt procedure should be used for which patient, that type of thing? Dr Chaichana: Yeah. So, there are different types of shunts, and the most common one that is used is called a ventricular peritoneal shunt. So, it has a ventricular catheter, it has a catheter that tunnels underneath the skin and it goes into the peritoneum where the fluid goes from the ventricular system into the peritoneum. Typically, the shunts are in the ventricle because that is the largest fluid-filled space in the brain. Other terminal areas include the atrium, which is really the jugular vein, and those are called ventricular atrial shunts. You can also have ventricular pleural shunts, which end in the pleural space and drain flui into the pleural space. Those are pretty much the most common ventricular shunts. There's also a lumboperitoneal shunt that drains from the lumbar spine, similar to a lumbar drain into the peritoneum. For the lumbar shunts, we don't typically have a lumbar pleural or lumbar atrial shunt just because of the pressure dynamics, because the lumbar spine is below the lung and as well as the atrium. And so, the drainage pattern is very different than ventricular peritoneal which is top to bottom. The most common shunt, why we use the ventricular peritoneal shunt the most, is because it has the most control. So, the peritoneum is set at a standard pressure in the intraabdominal pressure, whereas the ventricular atrial shunt depends on your venous return or venous pressure and your ventricular pleural shunt varies with inspiration and expiration. So, the easiest way for us to control the fluid, the ventricular system is through the ventricular peritoneal shunt. And that's why that's our most common shunt that we use. Dr Berkowitz: Fantastic. So, as you mention in the article, neurologists may be reluctant to offer a shunt to patients with NPH because many patients may not improve, or they improve only transiently; and out of fear of shunt complications. So, of course, as neurologists, we often only hear about a patient’s shunt when there is a problem. So, we have this sort of biased view of seeing a lot of shunt malfunction and shunt infection. Of course, we might not see the patient if their shunt is working just fine. How common are these complications in practice, and how do you as a neurosurgeon weigh the risks against the often uncertain or transient benefits of a shunt in a patient with NPH who may be older and multiple medical comorbidities? How do you think about that and talk about it with patients? Dr Chaichana: When you hear about shunt complications, most of the shunt complications you hear about are typically in patients with congenital hydrocephalus. Those patients often require several shunt revisions just from either growing or the shunt stays in for a long time or the ventricular caliber is a lot less than some with normal pressure hydrocephalus. So, we don't really see a lot of complications with normal pressure hydrocephalus. So that shunt placement in these patients is typically pretty safe. The procedure’s a relatively short procedure, around 30 minutes to 45 minutes to place a shunt, and we can control the pressure within the shunt setting so that we don't overdrain---which means too much fluid drains from the ventricular system---which can cause things like a subdural, which is probably the most common complication associated with normal pressure hydrocephalus. So, to obviate those risks, what we do is typically insert the shunt and then keep the shunt setting at a high setting. The higher the setting, the less it drains, and then we bring it slowly down based on the patient's symptoms to try to minimize the risk of this over drainage in the subdural hematoma while at the same time benefiting the patient. So, there's a concern for shunt in patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus. The concern or the complication risks are very low. The problem with normal pressure hydrocephalus, though, is that over time these patients benefit less and less from drainage or their disease process takes over. So, I do recommend placing this shunt as soon as possible just so that we can maximize their quality of life for that period of time. Dr Berkowitz: So, if I'm understanding you, then the risk of complication is more sort of due to the mechanical factors in patients with congenital hydrocephalus or sort of outgrowing the shunt, their pressure dynamics may be changing over time. And in your experience, an older patient with NPH, although they may have more medical comorbidities, the procedure itself is relatively quick and low-risk. And the actual complications due to mechanical factors, my understanding, are just much less common because the patient is obviously fully grown and they're getting one sort of procedure at one point in time and tend to need less revision, have less complication. Is that right? Dr Chaichana: Yeah, that's correct. The complication risk for normal hydrocephalus is a lot less than other types of hydrocephalus. Dr Berkowitz: That's helpful to know. While we're talking about some of these complications, let's say we're following a patient in neurology with NPH who has a shunt. What are some of the symptoms and signs of shunt malfunction or shunt infection? And what are the best studies to order to evaluate for these if we're concerned about them? Dr Chaichana: Yeah. So basically, for shunt malfunction, it’s basically broken down into two categories. It's either overdrainage or underdrainage. So, underdrainage is where the shunt doesn't function enough. And so basically, they return to their state before the shunt was placed. So that could be worsening gait function, memory function, urinary incontinence are the typical symptoms we look for in patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus and underdrainage, or the shunt is not working. For patients that are having overdrainage, which is draining too much, the classic sign is typically headaches when they stand up. And the reason behind that is when there's overdrainage, there's less cerebrospinal fluid in their ventricular system, which means less intracranial pressure. So that when they stand up, the pressure differential between their head and the ground is more than when they're lying down. And because of that pressure differential, they usually have worsening headaches when standing up or sitting up. The other thing are severe headaches, which would be a sign of a subdural hematoma or focality in their neurological symptoms that could point to a subdural hematoma, such as weakness, numbness, speaking problems, depending on the hemisphere. How we work this up is, regardless if you're concerned about overdrainage or underdrainage, we usually start with a CAT scan or an MRI scan. Typically, we prefer a CAT scan because it's quicker, but the CAT scan will show us if the ventricular caliber is the same and/or the placement of the proximal catheter. So, what we look for when we see that CAT scan or that MRI to see the location of the proximal catheter to make sure it hasn't changed from any previous settings. And then we see the caliber of the ventricles. If the caliber of the ventricles is smaller, that could be a sign of overdrainage. If the caliber of the ventricles are larger, it could be a sign of underdrainage. The other thing we look for are subdural fluid collections or hydromas or subdural hematomas, which would be another sign of lower endocranial pressure, which would be a sign of overdrainage. So those are the biggest signs we look for, for underdrainage and overdrainage. Other things we can look for if we're concerned of the shunt is fractured, we do a shunt X-ray and what a shunt x-ray is is x-rays of the skull, the neck and the abdomen to see the catheter to make sure it's not kinked or fractured. If you're really concerned, you can't tell from the x-ray, another scan to order is a CT of the chest and abdomen and pelvis to look at the location of the catheter to make sure there's no brakes in the catheter, there's no fluid collections on the distal portion of the catheter, which would be a sign of shunt malfunction as well. Other tests that you can do to really exclude shunt malfunction is a shunt patency test, and what that is a nuclear medicine test where radionucleotide is injected into the valve and then the radionucleotide is traced over time or imaged through time to make sure that it's draining appropriately from the valve into the distal catheter into the peritoneum or the distal site. If there's a shunt malfunction that's not drainage, that radioisotope would remain stagnant either in the valve or in the catheter. There's overdrainage, we can't really tell, but there will be a quick drainage of the radioisotope. For shunt infection, we start with an imaging just to make sure there's not a shunt malfunction, and that usually requires cerebrospinal fluid to test. The cerebrospinal fluid can come from the valve itself, or it can come from other areas like the lumbar spine. If the lumbar spine is showing signs of shunt infection, then that usually means the shunt is infected. If the valve is aspirated with- at the bedside with a butterfly needle into the valve and that shows signs of shunt infection, that also could be a sign of infection. Dr Berkowitz: That's very helpful. You mentioned CT and shunt series. One question that often comes up when obtaining neuroimaging in patients with a shunt, who have NPH or otherwise, is whether we need to call you when we're doing an MRI to reprogram the shunt before or after. Is there a way we can know as a neurologists at the bedside or as patients carry a card, like with some devices where we know whether we have to call and bother our neurosurgery colleagues to get this MRI? Or if the radiology techs ask us, is this safe? And is the patient's shunt going to get turned off? How do we go about determining this? Dr Chaichana: Yeah, so unfortunately, a lot of patients don't carry a card. We typically offer a card when we do the shunt, but that card, there's two problems with it. One is it tells the model, but the second thing is it has to be updated any time the shunt is changed to a different setting. Oftentimes patients don't know that shunt setting, and often times they don't know that company brand that they use. There are different types of shunts with different types of settings. If there's ever concern as to what type of shunt they have, an x-ray is usually the best bet to see with a shunt series, or a skull x-ray. A lateral skull x-ray usually looks at the valve, and the valve has certain radio-dense markers that indicate what type of shunt it is. And that way you can call neurosurgery and we can always tell you what the shunt setting is before the MRI is done. Problem with an MRI scan if you do it without a shunt x-ray before is that you don't know the setting before unless the patient really knows or it's in the patient chart, and the MRI can need to change the setting. It doesn't usually turn it off, but it would change the setting, which would change the fluid dynamics within their ventricular system, which could lead to overdrainage or underdrainage. So, any time a patient needs MRI imaging, whether it's even the brain MRI, a spine MRI, or even abdominal MRI, really a shunt x-ray should be done just to see the shunt setting so that it could be returned to that setting after the MRI is done. Dr Berkowitz: So, the only way to know sort of what type of shunt it would be short of the patient knowing or the patient getting care at the same hospital where the shunt was placed and looking it up in the operative reports would be a skull film. That would then tell us what type of shunt is there and then the marking of the setting. And then we would be able to call our colleagues in neurosurgery and say, this patient is getting an MRI this is the setting, this is the type of shunt. And do we need to call you afterwards to come by and reprogram it? Is that right? Dr Chaichana: That's correct, yeah. Dr Berkowitz: Is there anything we would be able to see on there, or it's best we just- best we just call you and clarify? Dr Chaichana: The easiest thing to do is, when you get the skull x-ray, you can Google different types of shunts or search for different shunts, and they'll have markers that show the type of shunt it is as well as the setting that it's at. And just match it up with the picture. Dr Berkowitz: And as long as it's not a programmable shunt, there's no concern about doing the MRI. Is that right? Dr Chaichana: Correct. So, if it's a programmable shunt, even if it's MRI-compatible, we still like to get the setting before and make sure the setting after the MRI is the same. Nonprogrammable shunts can't be changed with MRI scans, and those don't need neurosurgery after the MRI scan, but it should be confirmed before the scan is done. Dr Berkowitz: Very helpful. Okay, so let's turn to NPH specifically. As you know, there's a lot of debate in the literature, some arguing, even, NPH might not even exist, some saying it's underdiagnosed. I think. I don't know if it was last year at our American Academy of Neurology conference or certainly in recent years, there was a pro and con debate of “we are underdiagnosing NPH” versus “we are overdiagnosing NPH.” What's your perspective as a neurosurgeon? What's the perspective in neurosurgery? Is this something we're underdiagnosing, and the times you shunt these patients you see miraculous results? Is this something that we're overdiagnosing, you get a lot of patients sent to that you think maybe won't benefit from a shunt? Or is it just really hard to say and some patients have shunt-responsive noncommunicating hydrocephalus of unclear etiology and either concurrent Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, cervical lumbar stenosis, neuropathy, vestibular problems, and all these other issues that play into multifactorial gait to sort of display a certain amount of the percentage of problem in a given patient or take overtime? What's your perspective if you're open to sharing it, or what's the perspective of neurosurgery? Is this debated as it is in neurology or this is just a standard thing you see and patients respond to shunt to some degree in some proportion of the time? And what are the sort of predictors you see in your experience? Dr Chaichana: Yeah, so, for me, I'd say it's too complicated for a neurosurgeon to evaluate. We rely on neurology to tell us whether or not they need a shunt. But I think the problem is, obviously, a part of the workout for at least the ones that I like to do, is that I want them to have a high-volume lumbar puncture with pre- and postgait analysis to see if there's really an objective measure of them improving. If they have an objective measure of improvement---and what's even better is that they have a subjective measure of improvement on top of the objective measure of improvement---then they benefit from a shunt. The problem is, some patients do benefit even though they don't have objective performance increases after a high-volume shunt. And those are the ones that make me the most worrisome to do the shunt, just because I don't like to do a procedure where there's no benefit for the patient. I do see, according to the literature as well, that there's around a 30 to 40%, even 50%, increase in gait function, even in patients that don't have large improvements following the high-volume lumbar puncture. And those are the most challenging patients for us as neurosurgeons because we'll put the shunt in, they say we're no better in terms of their gait, no better in terms of their urinary incontinence. We try to lower their shunt down to a certain setting and we're kind of stuck after that point. The good thing about NPH, though, is that, from the neurosurgery side, the shunt, like I said, is a pretty benign, low-risk procedure. So, we're not putting the patient through a very severe procedure to see if there's any benefit. So, in cases where we try to improve their quality of life in patients that don't have a benefit from high-volume lumbar puncture, we give them the odds of whether or not it's improving and say it might not improve. But because the procedure’s minimally invasive, I think it's a good way to see if we can benefit their quality of life. Dr Berkowitz: Yeah, it's a very helpful perspective. Yeah, those are the most challenging cases on our side as well, right. If the patient- we think they may have NPH, or their gait and/or urinary and/or cognitive problems are- at least have a component of NPH that could be reversible, we certainly want to do the large volume lumbar puncture and/or consider a lumbar drain trial, all discussed in other articles and interviews for this issue of Continuum, But the really tough ones, as you said, there is this literature on patients who don't respond to the large-volume lumbar puncture for some reason but still may be shunt responsive. And despite all the imaging predictors and all the other ways we try to think about this, it's hard to know who's going to benefit. I think that's really a helpful perspective from your end that, as you say in the very beginning of your article, right, maybe there's a little bit too much fear of shunting on the neurology side because when we hear about shunts, it's often in the setting of complication. And so, we're not sort...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660495
info_outline
Radiographic Evaluation of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus With Dr. Aaron Switzer
07/09/2025
Radiographic Evaluation of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus With Dr. Aaron Switzer
Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is a clinical syndrome of gait abnormality, cognitive impairment, and urinary incontinence. Evaluation of CSF dynamics, patterns of fludeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake, and patterns of brain stiffness may aid in the evaluation of challenging cases that lack typical clinical and structural radiographic features. In this episode, Katie Grouse, MD, FAAN, speaks with Aaron Switzer, MD, MSc, author of the article “Radiographic Evaluation of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Grouse is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a clinical assistant professor at the University of California San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Dr. Switzer is a clinical assistant professor of neurology in the department of clinical neurosciences at the University of Calgary in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Grouse: This is Dr Katie Grouse. Today I'm interviewing Dr Aaron Switzer about his article on radiographic evaluation of normal pressure hydrocephalus, which he wrote with Dr Patrice Cogswell. This article appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr. Switzer: Thanks so much for having me, Katie. I'm a neurologist that's working up in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, and I have a special interest in normal pressure hydrocephalus. So, I'm very happy to be here today to talk about the radiographic evaluation of NPH. Dr Grouse: I'm so excited to have you here today. It was really wonderful to read your article. I learned a lot on a topic that is not something that I frequently evaluate in my clinic. So, it's really just a pleasure to have you here to talk about this topic. So, I'd love to start by asking, what is the key message that you hope for neurologists who read your article to take away from it? Dr. Switzer: The diagnosis of NPH can be very difficult, just given the clinical heterogeneity in terms of how people present and what their images look like. And so, I'd like readers to know that detailed review of the patient's imaging can be very helpful to identify those that will clinically improve with shunt surgery. Dr Grouse: There's another really great article in this edition of Continuum that does a really great job delving into the clinical history and exam findings of NPH. So, I don't want to get into that topic necessarily today. However, I'd love to hear how you approach a case of a hypothetical patient, say, where you're suspicious of NPH based on the history and exam. I'd love to talk over how you approach the imaging findings when you obtain an MRI of the brain, as well as any follow-up imaging or testing that you generally recommend. Dr. Switzer: So, I break my approach down into three parts. First, I want to try to identify ventriculomegaly and any signs that would support that, and specifically those that are found in NPH. Secondly, I want to look for any alternative pathology or evidence of alternative pathology to explain the patient's symptoms. And then also evaluate any contraindications for shunt surgery. For the first one, usually I start with measuring Evans index to make sure that it's elevated, but then I want to measure one of the other four measurements that are described in the article, such as posterior colossal angle zed-Evans index---or z-Evans index for the American listeners---to see if there's any other features that can support normal pressure hydrocephalus. It's very important to identify whether there are features of disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus, or DESH, which can help identify patients who may respond to shunt surgery. And then if it's really a cloudy clinical picture, it's complicated, it's difficult to know, I would usually go through the full evaluation of the iNPH radscale to calculate a score in order to determine the likelihood that this patient has NPH. So, the second part of my evaluation is to rule out evidence of any alternative pathology to suggest another cause for the patient's symptoms, such as neurodegeneration or cerebrovascular disease. And then the third part of my evaluation is to look for any potential contraindications for shunt surgery, the main one being cerebral microbleed count, as a very high count has been associated with the hemorrhagic complications following shunt surgery. Dr Grouse: You mentioned about your use of the various scales to calculate for NPH, and your article does a great job laying them out and where they can be helpful. Are there any of these scales that can be reasonably relied on to predict the presence of NPH and responsiveness to shunt placement? Dr. Switzer: I think the first thing to acknowledge is that predicting shunt response is still a big problem that is not fully solved in NPH. So, there is not one single imaging feature, or even combination of imaging features, that can reliably predict shunt response. But in my view and in my practice, it's identifying DESH, I think, is really important---so, the disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus---as well as measuring the posterior colossal angle. I find those two features to be the most specific. Dr Grouse: Now you mentioned the concept of the NPH subtypes, and while this may be something that many of our listeners are familiar with, I suspect that, like myself when I was reading this article, there are many who maybe have not been keeping up to date on these various subtypes. Could you briefly tell us more about these NPH subtypes? Dr. Switzer: Sure. The Japanese guidelines for NPH have subdivided NPH into three different main categories. So that would be idiopathic, delayed onset congenital, and secondary normal pressure hydrocephalus. And so, I think the first to talk about would be the secondary NPH. We're probably all more familiar with that. That's any sort of pathology that could lead to disruption in CSF dynamics. These are things like, you know, a slow-growing tumor that is obstructing CSF flow or a widespread meningeal process that's reducing absorption of CSF, for instance. So, identifying these can be important because it may offer an alternative treatment for what you're seeing in the patient. The second important one is delayed onset congenital. And when you see an image of one of these subtypes, it's going to be pretty different than the NPH because the ventricles are going to be much larger, the sulcal enfacement is going to be more diffuse. Clinically, you may see that the patients have a higher head circumference. So, the second subtype to know about would be the delayed onset congenital normal pressure hydrocephalus. And when you see an image of one of these subtypes, it's going to be a little different than the imaging of NPH because the ventricles are going to be much larger, the sulcal enfacement is going to be more diffuse. And there are two specific subtypes that I'd like you to know about. The first would be long-standing overt ventriculomegaly of adulthood, or LOVA. And the second would be panventriculomegaly with a wide foramen of magendie and large discernomagna, which is quite a mouthful, so we just call it PAVUM. The importance of identifying these subtypes is that they may be amenable to different types of treatment. For instance, LOVA can be associated with aqueductal stenosis. So, these patients can get better when you treat them with an endoscopic third ventriculostomy, and then you don't need to move ahead with a shunt surgery. And then finally with idiopathic, that's mainly what we're talking about in this article with all of the imaging features. I think the important part about this is that you can have the features of DESH, or you can not have the features of DESH. The way to really define that would be how the patient would respond to a large-volume tap or a lumbar drain in order to define whether they have this idiopathic NPH. Dr Grouse: That's really helpful. And for those of our listeners who are so inclined, there is a wonderful diagram that lays out all these subtypes that you can take a look at. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with these different subtypes. Now it was really interesting to read in your article about some of the older techniques that we used quite some time ago for diagnosing normal pressure hydrocephalus that thankfully we're no longer using, including isotope encephalography and radionuclide cisternography. It certainly made me grateful for how we've come in our diagnostic tools for NPH. What do you think the biggest breakthrough in diagnostic tools that are now clinically available are? Dr. Switzer: You know, definitely the advent of structural imaging was very important for the evaluation of NPH, and specifically the identification of disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus, or DESH, in the late nineties has been very helpful for increasing the specificity of diagnosis in NPH. But some of the newer technologies that have become available would be phase-contrast MRI to measure the CSF flow rate through the aqueduct has been very helpful, as well as high spatial resolution T2 imaging to actually image the ventricular system and look for any evidence of expansion of the ventricles or obstruction of CSF flow. Dr Grouse: Regarding the scales that you had referenced earlier, do you think that we can look forward to more of these scales being automatically calculated and reported by various software techniques and radiographic interpretation techniques that are available or going to be available? Dr. Switzer: Definitely yes. And some of these techniques are already in development and used in research settings, and most of them are directed towards automatically detecting the features of DESH. So, that's the high convexity tight sulci, the focally enlarged sulci, and the enlarged Sylvian fissures. And separating the CSF from the brain tissue can help you determine where CSF flow is abnormal throughout the brain and give you a more accurate picture of CSF dynamics. And this, of course, is all automated. So, I do think that's something to keep an eye out for in the future. Dr Grouse: I wanted to ask a little more about the CSF flow dynamics, which I think may be new to a lot of our listeners, or certainly something that we've only more recently become familiar with. Can you tell us more about these advances and how we can apply this information to our evaluations for NPH? Dr. Switzer: So currently, only the two-dimensional phase contrast MRI technique is available on a clinical basis in most centers. This will measure the actual flow rate through the cerebral aqueduct. And so, in NPH, this can be elevated. So that can be a good supporting marker for NPH. In the future, we can look forward to other techniques that will actually look at three-dimensional or volume changes over time and this could give us a more accurate picture of aberrations and CSF dynamics. Dr Grouse: Well, definitely something to look forward to. And on the topic of other sort of more cutting-edge or, I think, less commonly-used technologies, you also mentioned some other imaging modalities, including diffusion imaging, intrathecal gadolinium imaging, nuclear medicine studies, MR elastography, for example. Are any of these modalities particularly promising for NPH evaluations, in your opinion? Do you think any of these will become more popularly used? Dr. Switzer: Yes, I think that diffusion tract imaging and MR elastography are probably the ones to keep your eye out for. They're a little more widely applicable because you just need an MR scanner to acquire the images. It's not invasive like the other techniques mentioned. So, I think it's going to be a lot easier to implement into clinical practice on a wide scale. So, those would be the ones that I would look out for in the future. Dr Grouse: Well, that's really exciting to hear about some of these techniques that are coming that may help us even more with our evaluation. Now on that note, I want to talk a little bit more about how we approach the evaluation and, in your opinion, some of the biggest pitfalls in the evaluation of NPH that you've found in your career. Dr. Switzer: I think there are three of note that I'd like to mention. The first would be overinterpreting the Evans index. So, just because an image shows that there's an elevated Evans index does not necessarily mean that NPH is present. So that's where looking for other corroborating evidence and looking for the clinical features is really important in the evaluation. Second would be misidentifying the focally enlarged sulci as atrophy because when you're looking at a brain with these blebs of CSF space in different parts of the brain, you may want to associate that to neurodegeneration, but that's not necessarily the case. And there are ways to distinguish between the two, and I think that's another common pitfall. And then third would be in regards to the CSF flow rate through the aqueduct. And so, an elevated CSF flow is suggestive of NPH, but the absence of that does not necessarily rule NPH out. So that's another one to be mindful of. Dr Grouse: That's really helpful. And then on the flip side, any tips or tricks or clinical pearls you can share with us that you found to be really helpful for the evaluation of NPH? Dr. Switzer: One thing that I found really helpful is to look for previous imaging, to look if there were features of NPH at that time, and if so, have they evolved over time; because we know that in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus, especially in the dash phenotype, the ventricles can become larger and the effacement of the sulci at the convexity can become more striking over time. And this could be a helpful tool to identify how long that's been there and if it fits with the clinical history. So that's something that I find very helpful. Dr Grouse: Absolutely. When I read that point in your article, I thought that was really helpful and, in fact, I'm guessing something that a lot of us probably aren't doing. And yet many of our patients for one reason or other, probably have had imaging five, ten years prior to their time of evaluation that could be really helpful to look back at to see that evolution. Dr. Switzer: Yes, absolutely. Dr Grouse: It's been such a pleasure to read your article and talk with you about this today. Certainly a very important and helpful topic for, I'm sure, many of our listeners. Dr. Switzer: Thank you so much for having me. Dr Grouse: Again, today I've been interviewing Dr Aaron Switzer about his article on radiographic evaluation of normal pressure hydrocephalus, which he wrote with Dr Patrice Cogswell. This article appears in the most recent issue of Continuum on disorders of CSF dynamics. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660480
info_outline
Clinical Features and Diagnosis of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus with Dr. Abhay Moghekar
07/02/2025
Clinical Features and Diagnosis of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus with Dr. Abhay Moghekar
Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is a clinical syndrome characterized by the triad of gait apraxia, cognitive impairment, and bladder dysfunction in the radiographic context of ventriculomegaly and normal intracranial pressure. Accurate diagnosis requires consideration of clinical and imaging signs, complemented by tests to exclude common mimics. In this episode, Lyell Jones, MD, FAAN speaks with Abhay R. Moghekar, MBBS, author of the article “Clinical Features and Diagnosis of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Jones is the editor-in-chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology® and is a professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Moghekar is an associate professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. Today I'm interviewing Dr Abhay Moghekar, who recently authored an article on the clinical features and diagnosis of normal pressure hydrocephalus for our first-ever issue of Continuum dedicated to disorders of CSF dynamics. Dr Moghekar is an associate professor of neurology and the research director of the Cerebrospinal Fluid Center at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. Dr Moghekar, welcome, and thank you for joining us today. Why don't you introduce yourself to our listeners? Dr Moghekar: Thank you, Dr Jones. I'm Abhay Moghekar. I'm a neurologist at Hopkins, and I specialize in seeing patients with CSF disorders, of which normal pressure hydrocephalus happens to be the most common. Dr Jones: And let's get right to it. I think most of our listeners who are neurologists in practice have encountered normal pressure hydrocephalus, or NPH; and it's a challenging disorder for all the reasons that you outline in your really outstanding article. If you were going to think of one single most important message to our listeners about recognizing patients with NPH, what would that be? Dr Moghekar: I think I would say there are two important messages. One is that the triad is not sufficient to make the diagnosis, and the triad is not necessary to make the diagnosis. You know these three elements of the triad: cognitive problems, gait problems, bladder control problems are so common in the elderly that if you pick 10 people out in the community that have this triad, it's unlikely that even one of them has true NPH. On the other hand, you don't need all three elements of the triad to make the diagnosis because the order of symptoms matters. Often patients develop gait dysfunction first, then cognitive dysfunction, and then urinary incontinence. If you wait for all three elements of the triad to be present, it may be too late to offer them any clear benefit. And hence, you know, it's neither sufficient nor necessary to make the diagnosis. Dr Jones: That's a really great point. I think most of our listeners are familiar with the fact that, you know, we're taught these classic triads or pentads or whatever, and they're rarely all present. In a way, it's maybe a useful prompt, but it could be distracting or misleading, even in a way, in terms of recognizing the patient. So what clues do you use, Dr Moghekar, to really think that a patient may have NPH? Dr Moghekar: So, there are two important aspects about gait dysfunction. Say somebody comes in with all three elements of the triad. You want to know two things. Which came first? If gate impairment precedes cognitive impairment, it's still very likely that NPH is in the differential. And of the two, which are more- relatively more affected? So, if somebody has very severe dementia and they have a little bit of gait problems, NPH is not as likely. So, is gait affected earlier than cognitive dysfunction, and is it affected to a more severe degree than cognitive dysfunction? And those two things clue me in to the possibility of NPH. You still obviously need to get imaging to make sure that they have large ventricles. One of the problems with imaging is large ventricles are present in so many different patients. Normal aging causes large ventricles. Obviously, many neurodegenerative disorders because of cerebral atrophy will cause large ventricles. And there's an often-used metric called as the events index, which is the ratio of the bitemporal horns- of the frontal horns of the lateral ventricles compared to the maximum diameter of the skull at that level. And if that ratio is more than 0.3, it's often used as a de facto measure of ventriculomegaly. What we've increasingly realized is that this ratio changes with age. And there's an excellent study that used the ADNI database that looked at how this ratio changes by age and sex. So, in fact, we now know that an 85-year-old woman who has an events index of 0.37 which would be considered ventriculomegaly is actually normal for age and sex. So, we need to start adopting these more modern age- and sex-appropriate age cutoffs of ventriculomegaly so as not to overcall everybody with big ventricles as having possible NPH. Dr Jones: That's very helpful. And I do want to come back to this challenge that we've seen in our field of overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis. But I think most of us are familiar with the concept of how hydrocephalus could cause neurologic deficits. But what's the latest on the mechanism of NPH? Why do some patients get this and others don't? Dr Moghekar: Very good question. I don't think we know for sure. And it for a long time we thought it was a plumbing issue. Right? And that's why shunts work. People thought it was impaired CSF absorption, but multiple studies have shown that not to be true. It's likely a combination of impaired cerebral blood flow, biomechanical factors like compliance, and even congenital factors that play a role in the pathogenesis of NPH. And yes, while putting in shunts likely drains CSF, putting in a shunt also definitely changes the compliance of the brain and affects blood flow to the subcortical regions of the brain. So, there are likely multiple mechanisms by which shunts benefit, and hence it's very likely that there's no single explanation for the pathogenesis of NPH. Dr Jones: We explored this in a recent Continuum issue on dementia. Many patients who have cognitive impairment have co-pathologies, multiple different causes. I was interested to read in your article about the genetic risk profile for NPH. It's not something I'd ever really considered in a disorder that is predominantly seen in older patients. Tell us a little more about those genetic risks. Dr Moghekar: Yeah, everyone is aware of the role genetics plays in congenital hydrocephalus, but until recently we were not aware that certain genetic factors may also be relevant to adult-onset normal pressure hydrocephalus. We've suspected this for a long time because nearly half of our patients who come to us to see us in clinic with NPH have head circumferences that are more than 90th percentile for height. And you know, that clearly indicates that this started shortly at the time after birth or soon afterwards. So, we've suspected for a long time that genetic factors play a role, but for a long time there were not enough large studies or well-conducted studies. But recently studies out of Japan and the US have shown mutations in genes like CF43 and CWH43 are disproportionately increased in patients with NPH. So, we are discovering increasingly that there are genetic factors that underlie even adult onset in patients. There are many more waiting to be discovered. Dr Jones: Really fascinating. And obviously getting more insight into the risk and mechanisms would be helpful in identifying these patients potentially earlier. And another thing that I learned in your article that I thought was really interesting, and maybe you can tell us more about it, is the association between normal pressure hydrocephalus and the observation of cervical spinal stenosis, many of whom require decompression. What's behind that association, do you think? Dr Moghekar: That's a very interesting study that was actually done at your institution, at Mayo Clinic, that showed this association. You know, as we all get older, you know, the incidence of cervical stenosis due to osteoarthritis goes up, but the incidence of significant, clinically significant cervical stenosis in the NPH population was much higher than what we would have expected. Whether this is merely an association in a vulnerable population or is it actually causal is not known and will need further study. Dr Jones: It's interesting to speculate, does that stenosis affect the flow of CSF and somehow predispose to a- again, maybe a partial degree for some patients? Dr Moghekar: Yeah, which goes back to the possible hydrodynamic theory of normal pressure hydrocephalus; you know, if it's obstructing normal CSF flow, you know, are the hydrodynamics affected in the brain that in turn could lead to the development of hydrocephalus. Dr Jones: One of the things I really enjoyed about your article, Abhay, was the very strong clinical focus, right? We can't just take an isolated biomarker or radiographic feature and rely on that, right? We really do need to have clinical suspicion, clinical judgment. And I think most of our listeners who've been in practice are familiar with the use and the importance of the large-volume lumbar puncture to determine who may have, and by exclusion not have, NPH, and then who might respond to CSF diversion. And I think those of us who have been in this situation are also familiar with the scenario where you think someone may have NPH and you do a large-volume lumbar puncture and they feel better, but you can't objectively see a difference. How do you make that test useful and objective in your practice? What do you do? Dr Moghekar: Yeah, it's a huge challenge in getting this objective assessment done carefully because you have to remember, you know, subconsciously you're telling the patients, I think you have NPH. I'm going to do this spinal tap, and if you walk better afterwards, you're going to get a shunt and you're going to be cured. And you can imagine the huge placebo response that can elicit in our subjects. So, we always like to see, definitely, did the patient subjectively feel better? Because yes, that's an important metric to consider because we want them to feel better. But we also wanted to be grounded in objective truths. And for that, we need to do different tests of speed, balance and endurance. Not everyone has the resources to do this, but I think it's important to test different domains. Just like for cognition, you know, we just don't test memory, right? We test executive function, language, visuospatial function. Similarly, walking is not just walking, right? It's gait speed, it's balance, and it's endurance. So, you need to ideally test at least most of these different domains for gait and you need to have some kind of clear criteria as to how are you going to define improvement. You know, is a 5% improvement, is a 10% improvement in gait, enough? Is 20%? Where is that cutoff? And as a field, we've not done a great job of coming up with standardized criteria for this. And it varies currently, the practice varies quite significantly from center to center at the current time. Dr Jones: So, one of the nice things you had in your article was helpful tips to be objective if you're in a lower-resource setting. For you, this isn't a common scenario that someone encounters in their practice as opposed to a center that maybe does a large volume of these. What are some relatively straightforward objective measures that a neurologist or someone else might use to determine if someone is improving after a large-volume LP? Dr Moghekar: Yeah, excellent question, Dr Jones, and very practically relevant too. So, you need to at least assess two of the domains that are most affected. One is speed and one is balance. You know, these patients fall ultimately, right, if you don't treat them correctly. In terms of speed, there are two very simple tests that anybody can do within a couple of minutes. One is the timed “up-and-go” test. It's a test that's even recommended by the CDC. It correlates very well with faults and disability and it can be done in any clinic. You just need about ten feet of space and a chair and a stopwatch, and it takes about a minute or slightly more to do that test. And there are objective age-associated norms for the timed up-and-go test, so it's easy to know if your patient is normal or not. The same thing goes for the 10-meter walk test. You do need a slightly longer walkway, but it's a fairly easy and well-standardized test. So, you can do one of those two; you don't need to do both of them. And for balance, you can do the 30-second “sit-to-stand”; and it's literally, again, 30 seconds. You need a chair, and you need somebody to watch the patient and see how many times they can sit up and stand up from a seated position. Then again, good normative data for that. If you want to be a little more sophisticated, you can do the 4-stage balance test. So, I think these are tests that don't add too much time to your daily assessment and can be done with even trained medical assistants in any clinic. And you don't need a trained physical therapist to do these assessments. Dr Jones: Very practical. And again, something that is pretty easily deployed, something we do before and then after the LP. I did see you mentioned in your article the dual timed up-and-go test where it's a simultaneous gait and executive function test. And I’ve got to be honest with you, Dr Moghekar, I was a little worried if I would pass that test, but that may be beyond the scope of our time today. Actually, how do you do that? How do you do the simultaneous cognitive assessment? Dr Moghekar: So, we asked them to count back from 100, subtracting 3. And we do it particularly in patients who are mildly impaired right? So, if they're already walking really good, but then you give them a cognitive stressor, you know, that will slow them down. So, we reserve it for patients who are high-performing. Dr Jones: That's fantastic. I'm probably aging myself a little here. I have noticed in my career, a little bit of a pendulum swing in terms of the recognition or acceptance of the prevalence of normal pressure hydrocephalus. I recall when I was a resident, many, many people that we saw in clinic had normal pressure hydrocephalus. Then it seemed for a while that it really faded into the background and was much less discussed and much less recognized and diagnosed, and less treated. And now that pendulum seems to have swung back the other way. What's behind that from your perspective? Dr Moghekar: It's an interesting backstory to all of this. When the first article about NPH was published in the Newman Journal of Medicine, it was actually a combined article with both neurologists and neurosurgeons on it. They did describe it as a treatable dementia. And what that did is it opened up the floodgates so that everybody with any kind of dementia started getting shunts left, right, and center. And back then, shunts were not programmable. There were no antibiotic impregnated catheters. So, the incidence of subdural hematomas and shunt-related infections was very high. In fact, one of our esteemed neurologists back then, Houston Merritt, wrote a scathing editorial that Victor and Adam should lose their professorships for writing such an article because the outcomes of these patients were so bad. So, for a very long period of time, neurologists stopped seeing these patients and stopped believing in NPH as a separate entity. And it became the domain of neurosurgeons for over two or three decades, until more recently when randomized trials started being done early on out of Europe. And now there's a big NIH study going on in the US, and these studies showed, in fact, that NPH exists as a true, distinct entity. And finally, neurologists have started getting more interested in the science and understanding the pathophysiology and taking care of these patients compared to the past. Dr Jones: That's really helpful context. And I guess that maybe isn't rare when you have a disorder that doesn't have a simple, straightforward biomarker and is complex in terms of the tests you need to do to support the diagnosis, and the treatment itself is somewhat invasive. So, when you talk to your patients, Dr Moghekar, and you've established the diagnosis and have recommended them for CSF diversion, what do you tell them? And the reason I ask is that you mentioned before we started recording, you had a patient who had a shunt placed and responded well, but continued to respond over time. Tell us a little bit more about what our patients can expect if they do have CSF diversion? Dr Moghekar: When we do the spinal tap and they meet our criteria for improvement and they go on to have a shunt, we tell them that we expect gait improvement definitely, but cognitive improvement may not happen in everyone depending on what time, you know, they showed up for their assessment and intervention. But we definitely expect gait improvement. And we tell them that the minimum gait improvement we can expect is the same degree of improvement they had after their large-volume lumbar puncture, but it can be even more. And as the brain remodels, as the hydrodynamics adapt to these shunts… so, we have patients who continue to improve one year, two years, and even three years into the course of the intervention. So, we’re, you know, hopeful. At the same time, we want to be realistic. This is the same population that's at risk for developing neurodegenerative disorders related to aging. So not a small fraction of our patients will also have Alzheimer's disease, for example, or go on to develop Lewy body dementia. And it's the role of the neurologist to pick up on these comorbid conditions. And that's why it's important for us to keep following these patients and not leave them just to the neurosurgeon to follow up. Dr Jones: And what a great note to end on, Dr Moghekar. And again, I want to thank you for joining us, and thank you for such a wonderful discussion and such a fantastic article on the clinical diagnosis of normal pressure hydrocephalus. I learned a lot reading the article, and I learned a lot more today just in the conversation with you. So, thank you for being with us. Dr Moghekar: Happy to do that, Dr Jones. It was a pleasure. Dr Jones: Again, we've been speaking with Dr Abhay Moghekar, author of a wonderful article on the clinical features and diagnosis of NPH in Continuum's first-ever issue dedicated to disorders of CSF dynamics. Please check it out. And thank you to our listeners for joining today. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660455
info_outline
Treatment and Monitoring of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension With Drs. John Chen and Susan Mollan
06/25/2025
Treatment and Monitoring of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension With Drs. John Chen and Susan Mollan
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), a condition of increased intracranial pressure (ICP), causes debilitating headaches and, in some, visual loss. The visual defects are often in the periphery and not appreciated by the patient until advanced; therefore, monitoring visual function with serial examinations and visual fields is essential. In this episode, Kait Nevel, MD speaks with John J. Chen, MD, PhD, and Susan P. Mollan, MBChB, PhD, FRCOphth, authors of the article “Treatment and Monitoring of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Nevel is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a neurologist and neuro-oncologist at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, Indiana. Dr. Chen is a professor of ophthalmology and neurology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Dr. Mollan is an honorary professor of metabolism and systems science in the department of neuro-ophthalmology at University Hospitals Birmingham in Birmingham, United Kingdom. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guests: , Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Nevel: Hello, this is Dr Kate Nevel. Today, I'm interviewing Drs John Chen and Susan Mollan about their article on treatment and monitoring of idiopathic intracranial hypertension, which appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Drs Chen and Mollan, welcome to the podcast. And please, could you introduce yourselves to the audience? Dr Chen: Hello, everyone. I'm John Chen, one of the neuro-ophthalmologists at the Mayo Clinic. Thanks for having us here. Dr Mollan: Yeah, it's great to be with you here. I'm Susan Mollan. I'm a consultant neuro-ophthalmologist in Birmingham, England. Dr Nevel: Wonderful. So great to have you both here today, and our listeners. To start us off, talking about your article, can you share with us what you think is the most important takeaway from your article for the practicing neurologist out there? Dr Chen: Yeah, so our article talked about the treatment and monitoring of IIH. And I think one takeaway point is, IIH is becoming much more prevalent now that there's this worldwide obesity epidemic with obesity having- essentially being the largest risk factor for IIH other than female. It's really important to monitor vision because vision loss is often peripheral vision loss at first, which the patient may be completely unaware of. And so, it's important to pair up with an ophthalmologist so you can monitor the papilledema of the visual fields and make sure they don't get permanent vision loss. And in the article, we also talk about- there's been changes in the treatment of severe IIH, where traditionally, we used VP shunts; but there's been a trend toward using more venous sinus stenting in addition to the traditional surgeries. Dr Nevel: Great, thank you. I think probably most of our listeners or a lot of neurologists out there have a pretty good understanding of kind of the basics of the IIH. But can you kind of just go over a few key characteristics of IIH, and maybe some things that are less commonly known or things that are maybe just been kind of better understood over the past decade, perhaps? Dr Mollan: Yes, certainly. I think, as Dr Chen said, it's because this condition is becoming more prevalent, people recognize it. I think it's- we like to go back to the diagnostic criteria so that we're making a very accurate diagnosis. So, the patients may come in to the emergency room with, say, papilledema that's been identified elsewhere or crashing headaches. And it's important to go through that sort of diagnostic pathway, taking a blood pressure, taking a full blood count to make sure the patient is anemic, and then moving forward with that confirmation of papilledema into urgent neuroimaging, whether it's CT or MRI, but including venography to exclude a venous sinus thrombosis. And then if you have no structural lesion that's causing the raised ICP, it's moving forward with your lumbar puncture and carefully checking those pressures. But the patients may not only have crashing headache, they often have pulsatile tinnitus and neck pain. I think some of the features that we're now recognizing is the systemic metabolic effects that are unique to IIH. And so, there's an increased risk of cardiometabolic disease that's over and above what is conferred by obesity. Also, our patients have a sort of maternal health burden where they get impaired fertility, gestational diabetes and preeclampsia. And there's also an associated mental health burden, amongst other things. So we're really starting to understand the spectrum of the disease a bit more. Dr Nevel: Yeah, thank you for that. And that really struck me in your article, how important it is to be aware of those things so that we're making sure that we're managing our whole patient and connecting them with the appropriate providers for some of those other issues that may be associated. For the practicing neurologist out there without all the neuro-ophthalmology equipment, if you will, what should our bedside exam focus on to help us get maybe an early but accurate picture of the patient's visual function when we suspect IIH to be at play, perhaps before they can get in with the neuro-ophthalmologist? Dr Chen: Yeah, I think at the bedside you can still check visual acuity and confrontational visual fields, you know, with finger counting. Of course, you have to know that those are, kind of, crude kind of ways of screening. With papilledema, oftentimes the visual acuity is intact. And the confrontational visual fields aren't as sensitive as automated perimetry. Another important thing will be to do your direct ophthalmoscope and look at the amount of papilledema. If it's grade one or two papilledema on the more mild side, it's actually not vision threatening. It's the higher degrees of papilledema that can cause rapid vision loss. And so, if you look in and you see grade one papilledema, obviously you need to do the full workup, the MRI, MRV, lumbar puncture. But in terms of rapidly getting to an ophthalmologist to screen for vision loss, it's not going to be as important because you're not going to have vision loss at that low grade. If you look in and you see this rip-roaring papilledema, grade five papilledema, that patient is going to be at very severe risk of vision loss. So, I think that exam, looking at the optic nerve can be very helpful. And of course, talking to the patient about symptoms; is there decreased vision Is there double vision from a sixth nerve palsy? Are there transient visual obscurations which would indicate at least a higher degree of papilledema? That'd be helpful as well. Dr Nevel: Great, thank you. And when the patient does get in with a neuro-ophthalmologist, you talk in your article and, of course, in clinical practice, how OCT testing is important to monitor in this condition. Can you provide for the listeners the definition of OCT and how it plays a role in monitoring patients with IIH? Dr Mollan: Sure. So, OCT is short for optical coherence tomography imaging, and really the eye has been at the forefront of OCT alone. Our sort of cardiology colleagues are catching up on the imaging of blood vessels. But what it allows us to do is give us really good cross-sectional, anatomical-level changes that we can see both in the retina and also at the optic nerve head. And it gives us some really good measurements. It's not so good at sort of saying, is this definitely papilledema or not? That sort of lower end of disc elevation. But it is very good at ruling out what we call the pseudopapilledema. So, things like drusens or these other little masses we find underneath the optic nerve head. But in terms of monitoring, because we can longitudinally take these images and the reproducibility is pretty good at the optic nerve head, it allows us to see whether there's direct changes: either the papilledema getting worse or the papilledema getting better at the optic nerve head. It also gives us some indication of what's going on in the ganglion cell layer complex. And that can be helpful when we're thinking about sort of looking at structure versus function. So, ophthalmologists in general, we love OCT; and we spend much more time nowadays looking at the OCT than we really do the back of the eye. And it's just become critical for patients with papilledema to be able to be very accurate from visit to visit to see what's changing. Dr Nevel: How do you determine how frequently somebody needs to see the neuro-ophthalmologist with IIH and how often they need that OCT evaluation? Dr Chen: Once the diagnosis of IIH is made, how often they need to be seen and how frequent they need to be seen depends on the degree of papilledema. And again, OCT is really nice. You can quantify it and then different providers can actually use the same OCT numbers, which is super helpful. But again, if it's grade three papilledema or higher, or article thickness of 200 or higher, I tend to follow them a little bit more closely, trying to treat them more aggressively. Try to get the papilledema down into a safer zone. If it's grade one or two papilledema, we see them less frequently. So, my first visit might be three months out. They come with grade five papilledema, I'm seeing them within a few days to make sure that's papilledema’s come down quickly because we're trying to decide, are they going to need surgery or not? Dr Nevel: Yeah, great. And that's a nice segue into talking a little bit about how we treat patients with IIH after the diagnosis is confirmed. And I'd like to just point out you have a very lovely figure in your article---Figure 5-6,---that I'd like to direct our listeners to read your article and check out that figure, which is kind of an algorithm on how we think about the various treatment options for patients who have IIH, which seems to rely a lot on the degree of presence of papilledema and the presence of vision disturbance. Could you maybe walk us through a little bit about how you think about the different treatment options for patients with IIH and when more urgent surgical intervention might be indicated? Dr Mollan: Yeah, sure. We always find it quite hard in any medical specialty to write these kind of flow diagrams because it's really an individual we're looking at. But these are kind of what we’d say is “broad brushstrokes” into those patients that we worry about, sort of, red disease in those patients, more amber disease. Now obviously, even those patients that may not have severe papilledema, they may have crashing headaches. So, they may be an urgent referral themselves because of that. And so, it's nice to try and work out which end of the spectrum you're working with. If we think of the papilledema, Dr Chen's already laid out the sort of lower end of the prison's scale---our grades one, our grades two---that we're less anxious about. And those patients, we would definitely be having discussions about medical management, which includes acetazolamide therapy; but also thinking about weight management. And it may well be that we talk a little bit further about weight management, but I think it's helpful to sort of coach those conversations after you've made a definite diagnosis. And then laying out the risk that's caused, potentially, the IIH in an individual. And then having a sort of open conversation with them about what changes they can have in their lifestyle alongside thinking about medical therapy. There’s some patients with very low levels of papilledema that we decide not to put on medicines initially. As patients progress up that papilledema grade, we're definitely thinking about medical therapy. And our first line from the IIH treatment trial would be using acetazolamide, but we need to be thinking about using appropriate dosing. So, a lot of the patients that I see can be sent to me with very low doses that may be inappropriate for that person. In the IIHTT they used up to four grams daily in a divided dose. And you do need to counsel your patients when you're putting them on acetazolamide because of the side effects. You've got quite a nice table in this article about the side effects. I think if you get the patient on board, that they understand that they will experience side effects, that is helpful because they will expect it, and then possibly tolerate it a bit better. Moving through to that area where we're more anxious, that visual-threatening papilledema. As Dr Chen said, it's sort of like you look in and it's sort of “blood and thunder” in there. And you need to be getting on and encouraging the ophthalmologist to get a formal assessment of the visual field. It's very difficult to determine exactly the level at which- and we talk about the mean deviation in a lot of our research studies. But in general, it's a combination of things: the patient's journey to get to you, their symptoms, what's going on with the visual field, but what's also happening at the OCT. So, we look in and we see that fluid is seeping towards the fovea. We get very anxious, and those patients may not even have enough time for a rapid escalation of acetazolamide. It may well be at the first presentation, which we would term, like, fulminant; that we'd be thinking about surgical intervention. And I think before I stop, the other thing to say is, the surgical landscape is really changing. So, we're having some good studies coming out in terms of stenting. And so, there is a sort of bracket where it may well be that we are thinking about neuroradiological intervention in an earlier case. They may not quite be at that visual-threatening stage, but they may be resistant to medical treatments. Dr Nevel: Thank you for that. What do you think is a potential pitfall or a mistake to avoid, if you will, in the management of patients with IIH? Dr Chen: I think it's- in terms of pitfalls, I think the potential pitfalls I've seen are essentially patients where we don't necessarily create a good patient physician relationship. Where they don't have buy-ins on the treatment, they don't have buy-ins to come back, and they're lost to follow-up. And these patients can be dangerous, because they could have vision threatening papilledema and if not getting the appropriate treatment---and if they're not monitoring the vision---this can lead to poor outcomes. So, I've definitely seen that happen. As Dr Mollan said, you really have to tell them about the side effects from the medications. If you just take acetazolamide, letting them know the paresthesias and the changes in taste and some of these other side effects, they're going to immediately stop the medication. Again, and these medications do work, proven in the IIH treatment trial. So again, I think that patient-physician relationship is very important to make sure they have appropriate follow up. Dr Nevel: The topic of weight loss in this patient population can be tricky, and I know I talked with Susie in a prior interview about how to approach this topic with our patients in a sensitive and compassionate manner. Once this topic is broached, I find many patients are looking for advice on strategies for weight loss, or potentially medications or other interventions. How do you prioritize or think about the different weight loss strategies or treatments with your patients, and how do you think about the way that you recommend these different treatments or not? Dr Mollan: Yeah. I think that's a really great question because we sort of stray here into a specialty that we have not been trained in. One thing I definitely ask my patients: if they've been on a weight loss journey before, and what's worked for them and what's not worked for them. And within our different healthcare systems, we have access to different tiers of weight management approaches. But for the person sitting in front of me, that possibly there may be a long journey to access more professional care, it's about understanding. iIs there things that are free, such as, we have some apps in the National Health Service which are weight management applications where they can actually just start putting in their calories, their daily calorie intake. And those apps can be quite helpful and guiding in terms of targeting areas, but also informing the patient of what types of foods to avoid in their diet and what types of foods to include in their diet. And with some of the programs that are completely complementary, they also sometimes add on things about exercise. But I think it is a really difficult thing to manage as, say, an ophthalmologist or a neurologist, mainly because it's not our area of expertise. And I think we've all got to find, in our local hospitals and healthcare systems, those pathways where the patients may be able to access nutritional support, and sort of behavioral lifestyle therapy support, all the way through to the new medications for weight loss; and also for some people, bariatric surgery pathways. It's a tricky topic. Dr Nevel: So how should we counsel our patients about what to expect in the future in terms of visual outcomes? Dr Chen: I think a lot of that depends on the degree of papilledema when they present. If a patient comes in with grade five papilledema, that fulminant IIH that Dr Mollan had mentioned, these patients can have very severe vision loss. And even if we treat them very aggressively with high-dose medications and urgent surgical interventions, sometimes they can have permanent vision loss. And so, we counsel them that, you know, there's a strong chance that they're going to have a good amount of vision loss. But some patients, we're very surprised and we get a lot of vision back. So, we kind of set expectations, but we're cautiously optimistic that we can get vision back. If a patient presents with more mild papilledema like grade one or two papilledema, they're most likely not going to have any permanent vision loss as long as we're treating them, we're monitoring their vision, they're coming to their follow-ups. They tend to do very well from a vision perspective. Dr Nevel: That's great, thank you. And you know, ties into what you said earlier about really making sure that, you know, we create good- as with any patient, but good physician-patient relationships so that they, you know, trust us and they come to follow up so we can really monitor their vision appropriately. What do you think is going on in research in this area that's exciting? What do you think one of the next breakthroughs or thing that we need to understand the most about treatment and monitoring of IIH? Dr Chen: I think surgically, venous sinus stenting is going to probably take over the bulk of surgeries. We still need that randomized clinical trial, but we have some amazing outcomes with venous sinus stenting. And there's many efforts on randomized clinical trials for venous sinus stenting. So we'll have those results soon. From a medical standpoint, Dr Mollan can actually say, actually, more about this. Dr Mollan: I completely agree. The GLP-1 receptor agonists, the twofold prong approach: one is the weight loss where these patients, you know, have significant weight loss to put their disease into remission; and the other side of it is whether certain GLP-1s have the ability to reduce intracranial pressure. So, a phase 2 study that we undertook here in...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660415
info_outline
Clinical Features and Diagnosis of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension With Dr. Aileen Antonio
06/18/2025
Clinical Features and Diagnosis of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension With Dr. Aileen Antonio
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is characterized by symptoms and signs of unexplained elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) in an alert and awake patient. The condition has potentially devastating effects on vision, headache burden, increased cardiovascular disease risk, sleep disturbance, and depression. In this episode, Teshamae Monteith, MD, FAAN speaks with Aileen A. Antonio, MD, FAAN, author of the article “Clinical Features and Diagnosis of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Monteith is the associate editor of Continuum® Audio and an associate professor of clinical neurology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine in Miami, Florida. Dr. Antonio is an associate program director of the Hauenstein Neurosciences Residency Program at Trinity Health Grand Rapids and an assistant clinical professor at the Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine in Lansang, Michigan. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Host: Guest: Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Monteith: Hi, this is Dr Teshamae Monteith. Today I'm interviewing Dr Aileen Antonio about her article on clinical features and diagnosis of idiopathic intracranial hypertension, which appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Hi, how are you? Dr Antonio: Hi, good afternoon. Dr Monteith: Thank you for being on the podcast. Dr Antonio: Thank you for inviting me, and it's such an honor to write for the Continuum. Dr Monteith: So why don't you start off with introducing yourself? Dr Antonio: So as mentioned, I'm Aileen Antonio. I am a neuro-ophthalmologist, dually trained in both ophthalmology and neurology. I'm practicing in Grand Rapids, Michigan Trinity Health, and I'm also the associate program director for our neurology residency program. Dr Monteith: So, it sounds like the residents get a lot of neuro-ophthalmology by chance in your curriculum. Dr Antonio: For sure. They do get fed that a lot. Dr Monteith: So why don't you tell me what the objective of your article was? Dr Antonio: Yes. So idiopathic intracranial hypertension, or IIH, is a condition where there's increased intracranial pressure, but without an obvious cause. And with this article, we want our readers---and our listeners right now---to recognize that the typical symptoms and learning about the IIH diagnostic criteria are key to avoiding errors, overdiagnosis, or sometimes even misdiagnosis or underdiagnosis. Thus, we help make the most of our healthcare resources. Early diagnosis and management are crucial to prevent disability from intractable headaches or even vision loss, and it's also important to know when to refer the patients to the appropriate specialists early on. Dr Monteith: So, it sounds like your central points are really getting that diagnosis early and managing the patients and knowing how to triage patients to reduce morbidity and complications. Is that correct? Dr Antonio: That is correct and very succinct, yes. Dr Monteith: And so, are there any more recent advances in the diagnosis of IIH? Dr Antonio: Yes. And one of the tools that we've been using is what we call the optical coherence tomography. A lot of people, neurologists, physicians, PCP, ER doctors; how many among those physicians are well-versed in doing an eye exam, looking at the optic disc? And this is a great tool because it is noninvasive, it is high resolution imaging technique that allows us to look at the optic nerve without even dilating the eye. And we can measure that retinal nerve fiber layer, or RNFL; and that helps us quantify the swelling that is visible or inherent in that optic nerve. And we can even follow that and monitor that over time. So, this gives us another way of looking at their vision and getting that insight as to how healthy is their vision still, along with the other formal visual tests that we do, including perimetry or visual field testing. And then all of these help in catching potentially early changes, early worsening, that may happen; and then we can intervene more easily. Dr Monteith: Great. So, it sounds like there's a lot of benefits to this newer technology for our patients. Dr Antonio: That is correct. Dr Monteith: So, I read in the article about the increased incidence of IIH, and I have to say that I completely agree with you because I'm seeing so much of it in my clinic, even as a headache specialist. And I had a talk with a colleague who said that the incidence of SIH and IIH are similar. And I was like, there's no way. Because I see, I can see several people with IIH just in one day. That's not uncommon. So, tell me what your thoughts are on the incidence, the rising incidence of IIH; and we understand that it's the condition associated with obesity, but it sounds like you have some other underlying drivers of this problem. Dr Antonio: Yes, that is correct. So, as you mentioned, IIH tends to affect women of childbearing age with obesity. And it's interesting because as you've seen that trend, we see more of these IIH cases recently, which seem to correlate with that rising rate of obesity. And the other thing, too, is that this trend can readily add to the burden of managing IIH, because not only are we dealing with the headaches or the potential loss of vision, but also it adds to the burden of healthcare costs because of the other potential comorbidities that may come with it, like cardiovascular risk factors, PCOS, and sleep apnea. Dr Monteith: So why don't we just talk about the diagnosis of IIH? Dr Antonio: IIH, idiopathic intracranial hypertension, is also called pseudotumor cerebri. It’s essentially a condition where a person experiences increased intracranial pressure, but without any obvious cause. And the tricky part is that the patients, they're usually fully awake and alert. So, there's no obvious tumor, brain tumor or injury that causes the increased ICP. It's really, really important to rule out other conditions that might cause these similar symptoms; again, like brain tumors or even the cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Many patients will have headaches or visual disturbances like transient visual obscurations---we call them TVOs---or double vision or diplopia. The diplopia is usually related to a sixth nerve palsy or an abducens palsy. Some may also experience some back pain or what we call pulsatile tinnitus, which is that pulse synchronous ringing in their ears. The biggest sign that we see in the clinic would be that papilledema; and papilledema is a term that we only use, specifically use, for those optic nerve edema changes that is only associated with increased intracranial pressure. So, performing of endoscopy and good eye exam is crucial in these patients. We usually use the modified Dandy criteria to diagnose IIH. And again, I cannot emphasize too much that it's really important to rule out other secondary causes to that increased intracranial pressure. So, after that thorough neurologic and eye evaluation with neuroimaging, we do a lumbar puncture to measure the opening pressure and to analyze the cerebrospinal fluid. Dr Monteith: One thing I learned from your article, really just kind of seeing all of the symptoms that you mentioned, the radicular pain, but also- and I think I've seen some papers on this, the cognitive dysfunction associated with IIH. So, it's a broader symptom complex I think than people realize. Dr Antonio: That is correct. Dr Monteith: So, you mentioned TVOs. Tell me, you know, if I was a patient, how would you try and elicit that from me? Dr Antonio: So, I would usually just ask the patient, while you're sitting down just watching TV---some of my patients are even driving as this happens---they would suddenly have these episodes of blacking out of vision, graying out of vision, vision loss, or blurred vision that would just happen, from seconds to less than a minute, usually. And they can happen in one eye or the other eye or both eyes, and even multiple times a day. I had a patient, it was happening 50 times a day for her. It's important to note that there is no pain associated with it most of the time. The other thing too is that it's different from the aura that patients with migraines would have, because those auras are usually scintillating and would have what we call the positive phenomena: the flashing lights, the iridescence, and even the fortification that they see in their vision. So definitely TVOs are not the migraine auras. Sometimes the TVOs can also be triggered by sudden changes in head positions or even a change in posture, like standing up quickly. The difference, though, between that and, like, the graying out of vision or the tunneling vision associated with orthostatic hypotension, is that the orthostatic hypotension would also have that feeling of lightheadedness and dizziness that would come with it. Dr Monteith: Great. So, if someone feels lightheaded, less likely to be a TVO if they're bending down and they have that grain of vision. Dr Antonio: That is correct. Dr Monteith: Definitely see patients like that in clinic. And if they have fluoride IIH, I'm like, I'll call it a TVO; if they don't, I’m like, it's probably more likely to be dizziness-related. And then we also have patient migraines that have blurriness that's nonspecific, not necessarily associated with aura. But I think in those patients, it's usually not seconds long, it's usually probably longer episodes of blurriness. Would you agree there, or…? Dr Antonio: I would agree there, and usually the visual aura would precede the headache that is very characteristic of their migraine, very stereotypical for their migraines. And then it would dissipate slowly over time as well. With TVOs, they're brisk and would not last, usually, more than a minute. Dr Monteith: So, why don't we talk about routine imaging? Obviously, ordering an MRI, and I read also getting an MRV is important. Dr Antonio: It is very important because, one: I would say IIH is also a diagnosis of exclusion. We need to make sure that the increased ICP is not because of a brain tumor or not because of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. So, it's important to get the MRI of the brain as well as the MRV of the head. Dr Monteith: Do you do that for all patients’ MRV, and how often do you add on an orbital study? Dr Antonio: I usually do not add on an orbital study because it's not really going to change my management at that point. I really get that MRI of the brain. Now the MRV, for most of my patients, I would order it already just because the population that I see, I don't want to lose them. And sometimes it's that follow-up, and that is the difficult part; and it's an easy add on to the study that I'm going to order. Again, it depends with the patient population that you have as well, and of course the other symptoms that may come with it. Dr Monteith: So, why don't we talk a little bit about CSF reading and how these set values, because we get people that have readings of 250 millimeters of water quite frequently and very nonspecific, questionable IIH. And so, talk to me about the set value. Dr Antonio: Right. So, the modified Dandy criteria has shown that, again, we consider intracranial pressure to be elevated for adults if it's above 250 millimeters water; and then for kids if it's above 280 millimeters of water. Knowing that these are taken in the left lateral decubitus position, and assuming also that the patients were awake and not sedated during the measurement of the CSF pressure. The important thing to know about that is, sometimes when we get LPs under fluoroscopy or under sedation, then these can cause false elevation because of the hypercapnia that elevated carbon dioxide, and then the hypoventilation that happens when a patient is under sedation. Dr Monteith: You know, sometimes you see people with opening pressures a little bit higher than 25 and they're asymptomatic. Well, the problem with these opening pressure values is that they can vary somewhat even across the day. People around 25, you can be normal, have no symptoms, and have opening pressure around 25- or 250; and so, I'm just asking about your approach to the CSF values. Dr Antonio: So again, at the end of the day, what's important is putting everything together. It's the gestalt of how we look at the patient. I actually had an attending tell me that there is no patient that read the medical textbook. So, the, the important thing, again, is putting everything together. And what I've also seen is that some patients would tell me, oh, I had an opening pressure of 50. Does that mean I'm in a dire situation? And they're so worried and they just attach to numbers. And for me, what's important would be, what are your symptoms? Is your headache, right, really bad, intractable? Number two: are you losing vision, or are you at that cusp where your optic nerve swelling or papilledema is so severe that it may soon lead to vision loss? So, putting all of these together and then getting the neuroimaging, getting the LP. I tell my residents it's like icing on the cake. We know already what we're dealing with, but then when we get that confirmation of that number… and sometimes it's borderline, but this is the art of neurology. This is the art of medicine and putting everything together and making sure that we care and manage it accordingly. Dr Monteith: Let's talk a little bit about IIH without papilledema. Dr Antonio: So, let's backtrack. So, when a patient will fit most of the modified Dandy criteria for IIH, but they don't have the papilledema or they don't have abducens palsy, the diagnosis then becomes tricky. And in these kinds of cases, Dr Friedman and her colleagues, when they did research on this, suggested that we might consider the diagnosis of IIH. And she calls this idiopathic intracranial hypertension without papilledema, IIHWOP. They say that if they meet the other criteria for modified Dandy but show at least three typical findings on MRI---so that flattening of the posterior globe, the tortuosity of the optic nerves, the empty sella or the partially empty sella, and even the narrowing of the transverse venous sinuses---so if you have three of these, then potentially you can call these cases as idiopathic intracranial hypertension without papilledema. Dr Monteith: Plus, the opening pressure elevation. I think that's key, right? Getting that as well. Dr Antonio: Yes. Sometimes IIHWOP may still be a gray area. It's a debate even among neuro-ophthalmologists, and I bet even among the headache specialists. Dr Monteith: Well, I know that I've had some of these conversations, and it's clear that people think this is very much overdiagnosed. So, that's why I wanted to plug in the LP with that as well. Dr Antonio: Right. And again, we have not seen yet whether is, this a spectrum, right? Of that same disease just manifesting differently, or are they just sharing a same pathway and then diverging? But what I want to emphasize also is that the treatment trials that we've had for IIH do not include IIHWOP patients. Dr Monteith: That is an important one. So why don't you wrap this up and tell our listeners what you want them to know? Now's the time. Dr Antonio: So, the- again, with IIH, with idiopathic intracranial hypertension, what is important is that we diagnose these patients early. And I think that some of the issues that come into play in dealing with these patients with IIH is that, one: we may have anchoring bias. Just because we see a female with obesity, of reproductive age, with intractable headaches, it does not always mean that what we're dealing with is IIH. The other thing, too, is that your tools are already available to you in your clinic in diagnosing IIH, short of the opening pressure when you get the lumbar puncture. And I need to emphasize the importance of doing your own fundoscopy and looking for that papilledema in these patients who present to you with intractable headaches or abducens palsy. What I want people to remember is that idiopathic intracranial hypertension is not optic nerve sheath distension. So, these are the stuff that you see on neuroimaging incidentally, not because you sent them, because they have papilledema, or because they have new headaches and other symptoms like that. And the important thing is doing your exam and looking at your patients. Dr Monteith: Today, I've been interviewing Dr Aileen Antonio about her article on clinical features and diagnosis of idiopathic intracranial hypertension, which appears in the most recent issue of Continuum on disorders of CSF dynamics. Be sure to check out Continuum Audio episodes from this and other issues, and thank you to our listeners for joining today. Thank you again. Dr Antonio: Thank you. Dr Monteith: This is Dr Teshamae Monteith, Associate Editor of Continuum Audio. If you've enjoyed this episode, you'll love the journal, which is full of in-depth and clinically relevant information important for neurology practitioners. Use the link in the episode notes to learn more and subscribe. AAN members, you can get CME for listening to this interview by completing the evaluation at continpub.com/audioCME. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio.
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660405
info_outline
Radiographic Evaluation of Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension With Dr. Ajay Madhavan
06/11/2025
Radiographic Evaluation of Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension With Dr. Ajay Madhavan
Recently, sophisticated myelographic techniques to precisely subtype and localize CSF leaks have been developed and refined. These techniques improve the detection of various types of CSF leaks thereby enabling targeted therapies. In this episode, Katie Grouse, MD, FAAN, speaks with Ajay A. Madhavan, MD, author of the article “Radiographic Evaluation of Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension” in the Continuum® June 2025 Disorders of CSF Dynamics issue. Dr. Grouse is a Continuum® Audio interviewer and a clinical assistant professor at the University of California San Francisco in San Francisco, California. Dr. Madhavan is assistant professor of radiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Additional Resources Read the article: Subscribe to Continuum®: Earn CME (available only to AAN members): Continuum® Aloud (verbatim audio-book style recordings of articles available only to Continuum® subscribers): More about the American Academy of Neurology: Social Media Dr Jones: This is Dr Lyell Jones, Editor-in-Chief of Continuum. Thank you for listening to Continuum Audio. Be sure to visit the links in the episode notes for information about earning CME, subscribing to the journal, and exclusive access to interviews not featured on the podcast. Dr Grouse: This is Dr Katie Grouse. Today I'm interviewing Dr Ajay Madhavan about his article on Radiographic Evaluation of Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension, which he wrote with Dr Levi Chazen. This article appears in the June 2025 Continuum issue on disorders of CSF dynamics. Welcome to the podcast, and please introduce yourself to our audience. Dr Madhavan: Hi, thanks a lot, Katie. Yeah, so I’m Ajay Madhaven. I'm a neuroradiologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. I did all my training here, so, I've been here for a long time. And I have a lot of interest in spinal CSF leaks, and I do a lot of that work. And so I'm really excited to be talking about this article with you. Dr Grouse: I'm really excited too. And in fact, it's such a pleasure to have you here talking today on this topic. I know a lot's changed in this field, and I'm sure many of our listeners are really interested in learning about the developments and imaging techniques to improve detection and treatment of CSF leaks, especially since maybe we've learned about this in training. I want to start by asking you what you think is the most important takeaway from your article. Dr Madhavan: Yeah, that's a great question. I think---and you kind of already alluded to it---I think the main thing is, I hope people recognize that this field has really changed a lot in the last five to ten years, through a lot of multi-institutional collaboration and also collaboration between different specialties. We've learned a lot about different types of spinal CSF leaks, how we can recognize the disease, particularly the types of myelography that we need to be using to accurately localize and treat these leaks. Those are the things that have really evolved in the last five to ten years, and they've really helped us improve these patients’ lives. Dr Grouse: Can you remind us of the different common types of spinal leaks that can cause spontaneous intracranial hypotension? Dr Madhavan: Yeah, so there are a number of different spinal CSF leaks, types, and I would say the three most common ones that really most people should try to be aware of and cognizant of are: first, ventral dural tears. So those are, like, just physical holes in the dura. And they're usually caused by little bone spurs that come from the vertebral columns. So, they're often patients who have some degenerative changes in their spine. And those are really very common. Another type of spinal CSF leak that we commonly see is a lateral dural tear. So that's like the same thing in a slightly different location. So instead of being in the front, it's off to the side of the dura laterally. And so, it's also just a hole in the dura. And then the third and most recently discovered type of spinal CSF leak is a CSF-venous fistula. So those are direct connections between the subarachnoid space and little paraspinal vein. And it took us a long time to even realize that this was a real pathology. But now that it's been recognized, we've found that this is actually quite common. So those three types of leaks are probably the three most common that we see. And there's certainly others out there, but I would say over 90% of them fall into one of those three categories. Dr Grouse: That's a great review, thank you. Just as another quick review, as we talk more about this topic, can you remind us of some of the most common or typical brain imaging findings that you'll see in cases of spontaneous intracranial hypotension? Dr Madhavan: Yeah, absolutely. So, when you do a brain MRI in a patient who has spontaneous intracranial hypotension, you will usually, though not always, see typical brain MRI abnormalities. And I kind of think of those as falling into three different categories. So, the first one I think of is dural enhancement or thickening. So that's enlargement or engorgement of the dura, the pachymeninges, and enhancement on postgadolinium imaging. So, that's kind of the first category. The second is that, when you lose spinal fluid volume, other things often expand to take up the space. So, for example, you can get distension or enlargement of the dural venous sinuses, and sometimes you can also get subdural food collections or hematomas. They can arise spontaneously. And I kind of think of those as, you know, you, you've lost the cerebrospinal fluid volume and something else is kind of filling up the space. And then the third category is called brain sagging. And that's a constellation of findings where the posterior fossa structures and the pituitary gland in the cell have become abnormal because you've lost the fluid that normally cushions those structures and causes them to float up. For example, the brain stem will sag down, the distance between the mammillary body and the ponds may become reduced. The suprasellar cistern space may be reduced such that the optic chiasm becomes very close to the pituitary gland, and the prepontine cistern may also become reduced in size. And there are various measurements that can be used to determine whether something is subtly abnormal. But just generally speaking, those are really the three categories of brain MRI abnormalities you'll see. Dr Grouse: That was a great review. And of course, I think in many times when we are thinking about or suspecting this diagnosis, we may be lucky to find those imaging findings to reinforce a diagnosis. Because as it turns out, after reading your article, I was really surprised to find out that in as many as 19% of cases we actually see normal brain imaging, which really was a surprise to me, I have to say. And I think that this really encompasses why spontaneous intercranial hypotension is such a difficult diagnosis to make. I think a lot of us struggle with how far to take the workup when, you know, spontaneous intercranial hypotension is clinically suspected, but multiple imaging studies are normal. Do you have any guidance on how to approach these more difficult cases? Dr Madhavan: So, that's a really good question. And you know, it's- as you can imagine, that's a topic that comes up in most meetings where people discuss this, and it's been a continued challenge. And so, like you said, about 19 or 20% of patients who have this disease can have a, a normal brain MRI. And we've tried to do some work to figure out why that is and how we can identify patients who still have the disease. And I can just provide, I guess, some tips that have helped me in my clinical practice. One thing is, if I ever see a patient with a normal brain MRI where this disease is clinically suspected---for example, maybe they have orthostatic headaches or other very typical symptoms and we don't know why, but their brain MRI is normal---the first thing I do is I try to look back at their old imaging. So many times, these patients who present to us at Mayo, who, when we do their MRI scan here, their brain MRI looks normal… if you really look back at imaging that they've had done elsewhere---maybe even two to three years prior---at the time their symptoms started, they actually had some abnormalities. So, I might see that a patient, two years ago, had dural enhancement that spontaneously resolved; but now they still have symptoms of SIH and they may still have a CSF leak that we can find and treat, but their brain MRI has, for whatever reason, normalized. So, I always start by looking back at old imaging, and I found that to be very helpful. The other thing is, if you see a patient with a normal brain MRI, it's also important to look at their spine MRI because that can provide clues that might suggest that they could still have a spinal CSF leak. And the two things I look for on the spine MRI: one, if there's any extradural CSF. So, spinal fluid outside of where it's supposed to be within the confines of the subarachnoid space. And you know, really, if you see extradural CSF, you know they probably have a spinal fluid leak somewhere. Even if their brain MRI is normal, that just gives you the information that there is a dural tear probably somewhere. And so, in those patients we’ll definitely still proceed to myelography or other testing, even if they have a normal brain MRI. And then the last thing I look for is whether or not they have prominent meningeal diverticula. Patients with CSF venous fistulas almost always have one or more prominent diverticula on their spine along the nerve root sleeves. And that's probably because most of these fistulas come from nerve root sleeve diverticula. We don't completely understand the pathogenesis of CSF venous fistulas, but they're clearly associated with meningeal diverticula. So, if I see a patient who has a normal brain MRI, but I see on their spine MRI that they have many meningeal diverticula that are relatively prominent, that makes me more inclined to be a little bit more aggressive in doing myelography to find a CSF leak. And then I look at other demographic features, too. So, for example, elevated BMI and older age are associated with CSF venous fistulas. So, that can help you determine whether or not it's warranted to go on to more advanced imaging, too. So those are all just a variety of different things that we've used to help us. Dr Grouse: Thank you for sharing that. I wanted to go on to say that, you know, reading your article, of course, as you mentioned, you alluded to the fact there's lots of new imaging modalities out there. It was very illuminating and just an excellent resource for the options that exist and when they're useful. You did a great job summarizing it. And I encourage our readers to check out your article, to refresh themselves, update themselves on what's happened in this space. And of course, we can't summarize them all today, but I was wondering if you could possibly walk us through a hypothetical case of a patient who comes in with a history very suspicious for SIH? How would you approach this patient? Say you have gotten imaging that suggested that there is a spinal fluid leak and now you have to figure out where it is. Dr Madhavan: Yeah. So, you know, I think the most typical scenario it'll be a patient who has been seen by one of my excellent neurology colleagues and they've done a brain MRI and they've made the diagnosis through a combination of clinical information and brain MRI finding. And then the next thing we'll do always is, we'll obtain a spine MRI. So, I think of the purpose of the spine MRI as to determine what type of spinal fluid leak they have. On the spine MRI, if you see extradural CSF, those patients essentially always will have a dural tear. And it may be a ventral dural tear or a lateral dural tear. But if you see extradural CSF, that is pretty much what they have. And conversely, if you don't see extradural CSF---if you just see, for example, many meningeal diverticula, but you don't see anything else particularly abnormal---most of those patients have a CSF venous fistula, just common things being common. So I use the spine MRI to determine what type of leak they have. And then the next thing I think about is, okay, I'm going to do a myelogram on this patient. How do I want to position them? Because it turns out that positioning is probably the most important factor for finding these spinal fluid leaks. You have to have the patient positioned correctly to find the leak that you're trying to localize. And so, if I suspect they have a ventral dural tear, I will always position those patients prone for their myelogram. And I might do one of many different types of myelograms. And, you know, the article talks about things like digital subtraction myelography and dynamic CT myelography. And you can find any of these leaks with any of those techniques, but you just have to have the patient positioned correctly. So, if I think I have a ventral dural tear, I’ll put them prone for the myelogram. If I think they have a lateral dural tear, I'll put them in the cubitus position for the myelogram. And also, if they- if I think they have a CSF-venous fistula, I'll also put them in the decubitus position. Obviously if you're putting them in the decubitus position, you have to decide whether it's going to be left or right side down. So that may require a two-day exam. Sometimes you don't have to; in many cases, we're able to just do everything in one day. But those are all the different factors I think about when I'm trying to determine how I'm going to work those patients up further. So, I really use the spine MRI chiefly to think about what type of leak they're going to have and how I'm going to plan the myelogram. Dr Grouse: That's really great. And it's, I think, really nice to emphasize how much the positioning matters in all this, which I think is not something we've been classically taught as far as the diagnosis of spinal leaks. Another thing I'm really interested in your opinion on is, you talked a lot about how to optimize and what can make you successful at diagnosis. I'm curious what you think one of the easiest mistakes to make or, you know, that we should hopefully avoid when treating patients with this disease. Dr Madhavan: Yeah. And I think, you know, one other thing that's been discussed a lot in this topic… you know, we've talked about the patients with a normal brain MRI. Another barrier or challenge particularly with CSF-venous fistulas is, sometimes they can be very subtle on imaging. So, it's not always you see it very definitive CSF-venous fistula where you can say, like, there's no question, that's a fistula. There are many times where we do a good-quality myelogram and we see something that looks, like, possible for a CSF venous fistula, or probable. If I had to put a number on it, maybe there's a 50 to 70% chance of real. So, in those cases, we end up wondering, like, should we treat this suspected leak? And I think one common mistake or one thing that needs to be looked at further is, how do we handle these patients where we don't know whether the fistula is real or not? That's usually something where I will have a discussion with the patient, and I'm usually just very upfront with him about my interpretation of the imaging. I'll just tell them, we did a good-quality myelogram. You did a great job. We got good images. I don't see anything definitive, but I see this thing that I think has maybe a 60% chance of being real. And then I'll confer with one of my neurology colleagues and we'll decide whether it's worth treating that or not. And we'll just be very upfront with a patient about whether- about the likelihood of its success and what their long-term prognosis is. And oftentimes we let them make the decision. But I think that remains to be one of the big challenges is, how do we treat these patients who have suspected leaks that are not definitive on imaging. Dr Grouse: That sounds absolutely like an important area where there can be problems, so I appreciate that insight. I'm interested what you think in your article would come as the biggest surprise to our listeners who may not have kept up as much with all of the changes that have happened in recent years? Dr Madhavan: One of the things that was certainly, at least, a surprise to me as I was going through my training and learning about this topic is how diverse myelography has really become. You know, when I was a radiology resident, I learned about myelography as this thing that we've been doing for 30 to 40 years. And historically we've used myelograms just to look for degenerative changes: disc bulges, you know, disc herniations and things like that. Now that MRI is more prevalent, we don't use it as much, but it has turned out that it has a very big role in patients with spinal fluid leaks. Furthermore, something that I've learned is just how diverse these different types of myelograms have become. It used to kind of be just that a myelogram is a myelogram is a myelogram, but now we have different types of positioning, different types of equipment that we use. We vary the timing between contrast injection and imaging to optimize success for finding spinal fluid leaks. So, I think many times I talk to people who may not be as familiar with this field and they're surprised at just how diverse that has become and how sophisticated some of the various myelographic techniques have become and how much that really makes a difference in being able to accurately diagnose these patients. Dr Grouse: Well, I can say it was a surprise to me. Even as someone who does treat quite a few patients with this condition, I was surprised to see the breadth of different options that have become available. And then kind of a follow-up to that, what do you think the current area of controversy is in this area of diagnosis and treatment? Dr Madhavan: The biggest ones are ones you've sort of already alluded to. So, one big one is, how far do we go in patients who have a normal brain MRI who still have a clinical suspicion of the disease? And sometimes it's really hard, because sometimes you will find patients who clinically have a very strong case for having spontaneous intracranial hypotension. You look at them, they have very acute-onset orthostatic headaches. There's no better explanation for their symptoms that we know of. And it's hard to know what to do with those patients, because some of them want to continue to undergo diagnostic workup, but you can only do so many myelograms and you can only do so much with this diagnostic workup that requires some radiation dose before it becomes very challenging. That's a major point of just, I guess, ongoing research as to what can we do better for that subset of patients. Fortunately, it's not all of them, it's a subset of them, but I think we could help those patients better in the future as we learn more about the disease. So that's one. And the other one is treating these equivocal findings, like I discussed. And where should our threshold be to treat a patient, and what type of treatment should we do in patients where we don't know whether a leak is real? Should we just do a very noninvasive- relatively noninvasive blood patch? Do we do an embolization where we're leaving a foreign body there? Is it worth sending those patients to surgery? Those are all unanswered questions and things that continue to spark ongoing debate. Dr Grouse: Do you think that there's going to be any new big breakthroughs, or even, do you know of any big developments on the horizon that we should be keeping our eyes out for? Dr Madhavan: You know, I think for...
/episode/index/show/continuumjournal/id/36660340