More than 100 years after its emergence, the exact pathophysiological mechanisms underlying encephalitis lethargica (EL) are still elusive and awaiting convincing and complete elucidation. This article summarizes arguments proposed over time to support or refute the hypothesis of EL as an autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorder triggered by an infectious process. It also provides a critical evaluation of modern cases labeled as EL and a comprehensive differential diagnosis of autoimmune neurological conditions that could mimic EL. The evidence supporting the autoimmune nature of historical EL is sparse and not entirely convincing. It is possible that autoimmune mechanisms were involved in the pathogenesis of this disease as an idiosyncratic response to a yet unidentified infectious agent in genetically predisposed individuals. Although there has been an increase in the incidence of presumed autoimmune encephalomyelitis since the peak of EL pandemics, most evidence does not support an underlying autoimmune mechanism. There are significant differences between historical and recent EL cases in terms of clinical symptomatology, epidemiology, and neuropathological features, suggesting that they are different entities with only superficial similarity. The term “encephalitis lethargica,” still frequently used in the medical literature, should not be used for cases occurring at present in the sporadic form. Historical EL should be kept apart from recent EL, as they differ in important aspects.
Back to the future: encephalitis lethargica as an autoimmune disorder?
Vogrig A.
2023-01-01
Abstract
More than 100 years after its emergence, the exact pathophysiological mechanisms underlying encephalitis lethargica (EL) are still elusive and awaiting convincing and complete elucidation. This article summarizes arguments proposed over time to support or refute the hypothesis of EL as an autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorder triggered by an infectious process. It also provides a critical evaluation of modern cases labeled as EL and a comprehensive differential diagnosis of autoimmune neurological conditions that could mimic EL. The evidence supporting the autoimmune nature of historical EL is sparse and not entirely convincing. It is possible that autoimmune mechanisms were involved in the pathogenesis of this disease as an idiosyncratic response to a yet unidentified infectious agent in genetically predisposed individuals. Although there has been an increase in the incidence of presumed autoimmune encephalomyelitis since the peak of EL pandemics, most evidence does not support an underlying autoimmune mechanism. There are significant differences between historical and recent EL cases in terms of clinical symptomatology, epidemiology, and neuropathological features, suggesting that they are different entities with only superficial similarity. The term “encephalitis lethargica,” still frequently used in the medical literature, should not be used for cases occurring at present in the sporadic form. Historical EL should be kept apart from recent EL, as they differ in important aspects.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.