Originally Posted by lady_express_44

... what they're waiting for is either a second event (similar but different to the first) which would verify dissemination in "time". They also want it to occur in to different neurological area, which would give them dissemination in "space". That alone could get you a dx, with or without MRI verification.



That table is kinda confusing, when not in context of the entire article, but what it is saying is that you need 2 attacks + 2 "clinical" lesions (two different neurological areas affected). If you don't have that, then you move down to the next level of required evidence (on the table above).

However, if there isn't another clear attack that occurs, they will use the first attack as evidence of "one", then rely solely on the MRI results to eventually give them the evidence of dissemination in time and space. The criteria is much higher when relying on the MRI (and not a clear attack).

For proof of dissemination in space, they want to see a set combination of lesions apparent on the MRI:



As far as whether you had a second attack, they will need to see objective evidence of that before they would disregard the lack of sufficient (according to the above "space" table) MRI results.

For dissemination in time (and with no obvious "clinical" attacks), they have set criteria too:



Soooo.... you need to go to the neuro when you are in an attack!! Often the inflammation that is going on in an attack will clear up on a MRI within 30 days, so you need to get a MRI of these transitory lesions when the attack is happening. There can be permanent lesions that are there after the attack, but not necessarily either.