Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News & Views
  • Published:

Infectious disease

Diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis — a difficult update

A recent study proposed a modified version of the current diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis, but the value of the modifications is unclear and the study design limits conclusions about the validity of the new criteria. Instead, the suggested changes might contribute to future revision of the existing diagnostic criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Purchase on Springer Link

Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Coyle, C. M. et al. Neurocysticercosis: neglected but not forgotten. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 6, e1500 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Carpio, A. et al. New diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis: reliability and validity. Ann. Neurol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ana.24732 (2016).

  3. Del Brutto, O. H. et al. Proposal of diagnostic criteria for human cysticercosis and neurocysticercosis. J. Neurol. Sci. 142, 1–6 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Del Brutto, O. H. et al. Proposed diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis. Neurology. 57, 177–183 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nash, T. E., Garcia, H. H., Rajshekhar, V. & Del Brutto, O. H. in WHO/FAO/OIE Guidelines for the Surveillance, Prevention and Control of Taeniosis/Cysticercosis. (ed. Murrell, K. D.) 11–25 (OIE/WHO/FAO, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Carpio, A. Commentary. J. Neurosci. Rural Pract. 5, S92–S93 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Rodriguez, S., Wilkins, P. & Dorny, P. Immunological and molecular diagnosis of cysticercosis. Pathog. Glob. Health 106, 286–298 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mahale, R. R., Mehta, A. & Rangasetty, S. Extraparenchymal (racemose) neurocysticercosis and its multitude manifestations: a comprehensive review. J. Clin. Neurol. 11, 203–211 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Troiani, C., Lopes, C. C., Scardovelli, C. A. & Nai, G. A. Cystic brain metastases radiologically simulating neurocysticercosis. Sao Paulo Med. J. 129, 352–356 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bick, B. L., Haji, S., Laughlin, R. S., Watson, R. E. & Kumar, N. Metastatic breast cancer suggesting parasitic disease. Neurology. 79, 2366 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert H. Gilman.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author participated in the 2001 update of the Del Brutto diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis and in further revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gilman, R. Diagnostic criteria for neurocysticercosis — a difficult update. Nat Rev Neurol 12, 560–561 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2016.145

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2016.145

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing