BACKGROUND: Cervical dystonia is characterized by a variable pattern of neck muscle involvement. Due to the lack of a diagnostic test, cervical dystonia diagnosis is based on clinical examination and is therefore subjective. The present work was designed to provide practical guidance for clinicians in confirming or refuting suspected cervical dystonia.
METHODS: Participants were video recorded according to a standardized protocol to assess 6 main clinical features possibly contributing to cervical dystonia diagnosis: presence of repetitive, patterned head/neck movements/postures inducing head/neck deviation from neutral position (item 1); sensory trick (item 2); and red flags related to conditions mimicking dystonia that should be absent in dystonia (items 3-6). Inter-/intra-rater agreement among three independent raters was assessed by k statistics. To estimate sensitivity and specificity, the gold standard was cervical dystonia diagnosis reviewed at each site by independent senior neurologists.
RESULTS: The validation sample included 43 idiopathic cervical dystonia patients and 41 control subjects (12 normal subjects, 6 patients with isolated head tremor, 4 with chorea, 6 with tics, 4 with head ptosis due to myasthenia or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, 7 with orthopedic/rheumatologic neck diseases, and 2 with ocular torticollis). The best combination of sensitivity and specificity was observed considering all the items except for an item related to capability to voluntarily suppress spasms (sensitivity: 96.1%; specificity: 81%).
CONCLUSIONS: An accurate diagnosis of cervical dystonia can be achieved if, in addition to the core motor features, we also consider some clinical features related to dystonia mimics that should be absent in dystonia.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The dystonias are phenotypically and etiologically heterogenous disorders. Many proposals and a consensus recommendation have been provided for the diagnosis and classification of the dystonias, but these recommendations serve only as general guidelines. Current diagnosis and classification may still depend on clinical judgment causing different opinions.
OBJECTIVE: To delineate clinical features used by movement disorder specialists in the diagnosis and classification of isolated focal cervical dystonia, and to develop recommendations for a more consistent approach to classification according to anatomical regions involved.
METHODS: Cross-sectional data for subjects diagnosed with isolated dystonia were acquired from the Dystonia Coalition, an international, multicenter collaborative research network. Data from many movement disorder specialists were evaluated to determine how diagnoses of cervical dystonia related to their recorded examinations. Cases were included if they were given a diagnosis of focal cervical dystonia. Cases were also included if they had dystonia of the neck on exam, but were given an alternative diagnosis such as segmental dystonia.
RESULTS: Among 2916 subjects with isolated dystonia, 1258 were diagnosed with focal cervical dystonia. Among these 1258 cases, 28.3% had dystonia outside of the neck region. Regions involved outside of the neck included the shoulder, larynx, and sometimes other regions. Analysis of the results pointed to several factors that may influence specialists\' use of current diagnostic guidelines for making a diagnosis of isolated focal cervical dystonia including varied interpretations of involvement of nearby regions (shoulder, larynx, platysma), severity of dystonia across different regions, and occurrence of tremor in different regions.
CONCLUSIONS: Although focal cervical dystonia is the most common type of dystonia, a high percentage of subjects given this diagnosis had dystonia outside of the neck region. This observation points to the need for more specific guidelines for defining this common disorder. Such guidelines are proposed here.

In 2016, the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) published practice guidelines for botulinum toxin (BoNT) in the treatment of blepharospasm, cervical dystonia, adult spasticity, and headache. This article, focusing on dystonia, provides context for these guidelines through literature review. Studies that led to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of each toxin for dystonia indications are reviewed, in addition to several studies highlighted by the AAN guidelines. The AAN guidelines for the use of BoNT in dystonia are compared with those of the European Federation of the Neurological Societies (EFNS), and common off-label uses for BoNT in dystonia are discussed. Toxins not currently FDA-approved for the treatment of dystonia are additionally reviewed. In the future, additional toxins may become FDA-approved for the treatment of dystonia given expanding research in this area.