Multiple chemical sensitivity multiorgan dysesthesia, multiple symptom complex, and multiple confusion: problems in diagnosing the patient presenting with unexplained multisystemic symptoms

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), a condition also known as Chemical Sensitivity (CS), Chemical Intolerance (CI), Idiopathic Environmental Illness (IEI) and Toxicant Induced Loss of Tolerance (TILT), is an acquired multifactorial syndrome characterized by a recurrent set of debilitating symptoms. The symptoms of this controversial disorder are reported to be induced by environmental chemicals at doses far below those usually harmful to most persons. They involve a large spectrum of organ systems and typically disappear when the environmental chemicals are removed. However, no clear link has emerged among self-reported MCS symptoms and widely accepted objective measures of physiological dysfunction, and no clear dose-response relationship between exposure and symptom reactions has been observed. In addition, the underlying etiology and pathogenic processes of the disorder remain unknown and disputed, although biologic and psychologic hypotheses abound. It is currently debated whether MCS should be considered a clinical entity at all. Nevertheless, in the last few decades MCS has received considerable scientific and governmental attention in light of the many persons reporting this illness. In this review, we provide a general overview of the history, definition, demographics, prevalence, and etiologic challenges in defining and understanding MCS.

Feeling lightheaded: the role of cerebral blood flow

OBJECTIVE

The main aims of this study were a) to investigate the relationship between lightheadedness and cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFv) during hyperventilation-induced hypocapnia, and b) to investigate whether and why the relationship between lightheadedness and CBFv may change after several episodes of this sensation.

METHODS

Three hypocapnic and three normocapnic overbreathing trials were administered in a semirandomized order to healthy participants (N = 33). Each type of breathing trial was consistently paired with one odor. Afterward, participants were presented each odor once in two spontaneous breathing and in two normocapnic overbreathing trials. CBFv in the right middle cerebral artery was measured by transcranial Doppler ultrasonography (TCD). Also breathing behavior and self-reported lightheadedness were measured continuously. Each trial was followed by a symptom checklist.

RESULTS

Self-reported lightheadedness was closely related to changes in CBFv in the hypocapnic overbreathing trials. During the subsequent normocapnic trials, however, participants experienced more lightheadedness and "feeling unreal" to the odor that had previously been paired with hyperventilation-induced hypocapnia. These complaints were not accompanied by changes in end-tidal CO(2) nor in CBFv.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that lightheadedness is associated with changes in CBFv but that after a few episodes, the underlying mechanism for this symptom may shift to perceptual-cognitive processes. These findings may help to understand why lightheadedness occurs during emotional distress and panic. In addition, altered cerebral blood flow is unlikely to play a primary precipitating role in recurrent symptoms of lightheadedness.

The German Multicentre Study on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS)

In this multicentre study on multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) 291 consecutive environmental medicine (EM) outpatients were examined in several environmental medicine outpatient centres/units throughout Germany in 2000/2003. Of the EM outpatients, 89 were male (30.6%) and 202 were female (69.4%), aged 22-80 (mean 48 years, S.D.=12 years). The sample was representative for university-based environmental outpatient departments and represented a cross-sectional study design with an integrated clinical-based case-control comparison (MCS vs. non-MCS). Three classifications of MCS were used: self-reported MCS (sMCS), clinically diagnosed MCS (cMCS), and formalised computer-assisted MCS with two variants (f1MCS, f2MCS). Data were collected by means of an environmental medicine questionnaire, psychosocial questionnaires, the German version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and a medical baseline documentation, as well as special examinations in partial projects on olfaction and genetic susceptibility markers. The hypothesis guided evaluation of the project showed that the patients' heterogenic health complaints did not indicate a characteristic set of symptoms for MCS. No systematic connection could be observed between complaints and the triggers implicated, nor was there any evidence for a genetic predisposition, or obvious disturbances of the olfactory system. The standardised psychiatric diagnostics applying CIDI demonstrated that the EM patients in general and the subgroup with MCS in particular suffered more often from mental disorders compared to an age and gender matched sample of the general population and that in most patients these disorders commenced many years before environment-related health complaints. Our results do not support the assumption of a toxicogenic-somatic basis of the MCS phenomenon. In contrast, numerous indicators for the relevance of behavioural accentuations, psychic alterations or psychosomatic impairments were found in the group of EM-outpatients with subjective "environmental illness".

Discriminating between organic and psychological determinants of multiple chemical sensitivity: a case study

Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) is a controversial disorder characterized by a diverse set of debilitating symptoms purportedly induced by environmental chemicals. Many cases of putative MCS are believed to have a strong psychogenic component, making it difficult to differentiate between organic and psychogenic causes. In this case report we describe a procedure that can aid in this differentiation. A patient who met a strict set of criteria for MCS was tested on two test occasions. On the first, the patient was found to have no olfactory dysfunction, as determined from standardized olfactory tests. On the second, odorants, as well as a blank stimulus, were presented to the patient with instructions as to whether they were harmful or harmless. The patient's task was to estimate the intensity of each odorant and report any induced MCS-related symptoms. Potentially harmful odorants presented as harmless were judged significantly less intense, and triggered fewer symptoms, than harmless odorants presented as harmful. When an odorless stimulus was presented as harmful, the patient provided higher intensity evaluations and exhibited more symptoms than when it was presented as harmless. These phenomena were not present in three non-MCS controls. This straight-forward procedure allowed us to determine that the MCS symptoms of this patient were largely psychological and may be of general value for identifying psychogenic cases of MCS.

Interdisciplinary diagnostics in environmental medicine--findings and follow-up in patients with chronic medically unexplained health complaints

PROBLEM

In patients attributing their chronic, medically unexplained complaints to environmental factors the greatest challenge is to overcome their disabling belief in toxicogenic explanations.

METHOD

Patients presenting with health complaints that they attributed to environmental causes in an environmental outpatient department (EOPD) within a university medical center in Germany were studied. An interdisciplinary review of previously diagnosed medical conditions, current clinical consultations, personal risk communication and therapeutic advice is presented. Additionally, patient contentedness, complaint development, and belief in environmental attribution in a follow-up interview are given.

RESULTS

The open, prospective study comprises 51 patients reporting more than one complaint. Symptoms had lasted for more than 3 years in 63% of the cases. Seventy percent attributed their complaints to more than one environmental cause. The clinical diagnostic procedure reduced the number of prediagnosed clinical conditions by 50%. Numerous foregoing environmental laboratory analyses had overestimated toxicologically relevant findings. These were not confirmed in 80% (8/10) of the cases. In 8% (n = 4) of the patients a relevant environmental or occupational medical condition was found. A mental or behavioral condition was not considered to have first priority in explaining all complaints in 43% (22/51) of the patients. Among these, mostly respiratory or skin-related diseases were found. All patients contacted participated in a follow-up study after a minimum of 21 months. Sixty-seven percent reported having felt that they were taken seriously, 38% felt better after the beginning of the study, and 45% were no longer certain about the importance of the environmental attribution. Since 83% of the patients with a preceding residential diagnosis of MCS or SBS still believed in environmental causes of their complaints in the follow-up study, we conclude that these prediagnoses appear to be a risk for persisting attribution of the environmental factor. About one third (37%) of these patients with complaints that had not been medically explained by an organic condition during interdisciplinary diagnostics had meanwhile consulted a psychotherapist.

CONCLUSIONS

Interdisciplinary diagnostics and scientifically based risk assessment in a specialized clinical center were effective and mostly well accepted by the patients and resulted in reduced attribution of complaints to environmental conditions. No indication was found that patients with complaints not medically explained by organic conditions were managed less successfully by this approach. Considering the high costs that these patients have previously caused, it appears valuable to apply an interdisciplinary diagnostic strategy.

Are syndromes in environmental medicine variants of somatoform disorders?

To date, relatively little is known about the etiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, therapy, prevention and prognosis of environment-related syndromes like multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI), sick building syndrome (SBS), chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), candida syndrome (CS) and burnout syndrome (BS). Part of the reason is that these syndromes have not been clearly defined and classified in scientific categories distinct from each other, and that they show clinical similarities to classified somatoform disorders. Furthermore, there are at least three possible explanations for the existence of these syndromes: (1) The syndromes may result from the interaction of environmental factors, individual susceptibility and psychological factors (i.e., how they are perceived and seen by the patient); (2) they may reflect socially and culturally accepted methods of expressing distress; and/or (3) they may be iatrogenic. Despite all the uncertainties in evaluation of environmental syndromes, physicians have the duty to take the affected person's problems seriously. A comprehensive systematic classification which better accounts for these complex clinical manifestations is long overdue. Until these syndromes are well defined, the terms used for them should definitely not be applied to connote a specific disease process.

Idiopathic environmental intolerances (formerly multiple chemical sensitivity) psychiatric perspectives

Idiopathic environmental intolerances (IEI)/multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) is characterized by various somatic symptoms which cannot be explained organically, but are attributed to the influences of toxic environmental chemicals in low, usually harmless doses. In the absence of a widely accepted definition of IEI, contradictory aetiological hypotheses and therapeutic suggestions are discussed. Some authors doubt the existence of IEI/MCS as a disease entity of its own. The label IEI does not implicate neither a diagnosis of somatic disease nor that it is caused by an avoidable exposure. Many IEI patients suffer from psychiatric diseases. A majority of them can be diagnosed as somatoform disorders. Consequently, psychiatric therapies could be effective. This review describes the current knowledge about IEI/MCS, outlines a diagnostic algorithm and a psychotherapeutic concept for variants of IEI understood as a somatoform disorder.

Multiple chemical sensitivity: a review of the theoretical and research literature

Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) is a term used to describe a disorder characterized by a vast array of somatic, cognitive, and affective symptoms, the cause of which is attributed to exposure to extremely low levels of a variety of chemicals. Upon examination of the patient with a diagnosis of MCS, objective physical findings and consistent laboratory abnormalities are typically nonexistent. The concept of MCS has ignited considerable controversy in the fields of toxicology, immunology, allergy, psychology, and neuropsychology. Central to the controversy is the disagreement over the extent to which the manifestation of MCS is mediated by psychological factors. Because of the large number of neuropsychological symptoms associated with a diagnosis of MCS, neuropsychologists are increasingly receiving referrats for the assessment of these patients. It is important, therefore, that neuropsychologists become aware of the variety of clinical issues that must be taken into account when assessing an individual with a diagnosis of MCS. The theoretical and research literature on individuals with a diagnosis of MCS is reviewed here.

MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity): cooperation between toxicology and psychology may facilitate solutions of the problems: commentary

This commentary is the result of a discussion between the authors. After outlining the problem of MCS (A), to which the toxicologist was increasingly and painfully exposed, he was surprised to realise that the problem was well recognised in psychology. (B) In the second round of the discussion therapeutic implications are discussed.