In Reply We agree with Wang and colleagues that clinical-pathological correlation is important in diagnosing the cause of encephalitis. It is possible that with contemporary technology more of these cases might have been confirmed as autoimmune or paraneoplastic based on advances in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or serum detection of antineuronal antibodies (banked CSF or serum was not available). Unbiased sequencing techniques pioneered at our institution using CSF and biopsy material are also beginning to provide significant and actionable findings.1 However, even today, there are many cases of encephalitis wherein the final diagnosis remains elusive despite extensive commercial- and research-grade testing for infectious, paraneoplastic, and autoimmune causes. There are also still cases of encephalitis, not otherwise specified (ENOS) that become apparent on brain biopsy when the preoperative diagnosis was not necessarily encephalitis. Completion of the pathology report and assessment of pathological findings are hardly ever performed without clinical and radiological correlation, and it is the rule rather than the exception that in these enigmatic cases, there is extensive discussion between the pathologist and clinical team to better understand the findings. Our results indicate that when the initial pathological diagnosis is ENOS, re-review of the pathological material, clinical reevaluation, and focused laboratory testing can have added diagnostic value.2
Gelfand JM, Tihan T, Cree BA. Diagnosing Encephalitis, Not Otherwise Specified—Reply. JAMA Neurol. 2015;72(6):726–727. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2015.0548
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: