# Re-examining the Diagnostic Criteria for Wilson’s Disease: A Case Report and Literature Review

## TL;DR

This paper discusses a case where Wilson’s disease diagnostic criteria may be flawed, suggesting the need for updated guidelines and new technologies.

## Contribution

The paper highlights limitations in current diagnostic algorithms for Wilson’s disease and advocates for incorporating new biomarkers and technologies.

## Key findings

- A patient with a high EASL score did not have Wilson’s disease, indicating flaws in current diagnostic criteria.
- Newer guidelines from AASLD and BASL do not resolve diagnostic uncertainty in complex cases.
- Advanced techniques like next-generation sequencing or CRISPR-Cas-based tools may improve diagnosis.

## Abstract

Wilson’s disease (WD) is a heterogeneous genetic disorder for which diagnosis is challenging. We present the case of a 54-year-old woman with a complicated medical history, including hepatitis C, cirrhosis, hepatic encephalopathy, and extensive psychiatric disease, who was transferred to our hospital for management of a spinal epidural abscess. Further findings suggested undiagnosed WD, including bilateral rings around Descemet’s membrane and modestly low ceruloplasmin but normal urinary copper excretion. Many algorithms have been proposed for Wilson disease diagnosis, including clinical, laboratory, imaging, and genetic findings; however, no single test is diagnostic. The European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) guidelines are the most commonly employed algorithm. Updated 2022 guidelines by both the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and the British Association for the Study of the Liver (BASL) build upon this algorithm. Our patient scored 5 points on the EASL scale, which is sufficient for diagnosis. Nevertheless, we believe that she met the diagnostic criteria without having the actual disease. Newer guidelines by AASLD and BASL do not provide additional conclusivity. Our case demonstrates the need for re-evaluation of the diagnostic criteria of WD, where uncertainty can mean permanent hepatic and brain damage. Diagnostic guidelines should incorporate new biomarkers, ophthalmological techniques, and advanced technologies such as next-generation sequencing or CRISPR-Cas-based tools.