No abstract

We performed electrophysiological and serological testing within 15 days of symptom onset on 369 patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) enrolled in a trial comparing plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin, and both treatments. Patients were classified into five groups by motor nerve conduction criteria; 69% were demyelinating, 3% axonal, 3% inexcitable, 2% normal, and 23% equivocal. Six of 10 (60%) patients with axonal neurophysiology had had a preceding diarrheal illness compared with 71 of 359 (20%) in other groups. Antiganglioside GM1 antibodies were present in a higher proportion of patients with axonal physiology or inexcitable nerves than other patients. The number dead or unable to walk unaided at 48 weeks was greater in the group with initially inexcitable nerves (6 of 12, 50%) compared with the rest (52 of 357, 15%), but was not significantly different between the axonal (1 of 10, 10%) and demyelinating (44 of 254, 17%) groups. Sensory action potentials and clinical sensory examination were both normal in 53 of 342 (16%) patients, and these "pure motor GBS" patients were more likely than other GBS patients to have IgG antiganglioside GM1 antibodies and to have had preceding diarrhea but had a similar outcome. The axonal group was more likely than other groups to have normal sensory action potentials. The outcomes in response to the three treatments did not differ in any subgroup (including patients with pure motor GBS or preceding diarrhea) or any neurophysiological category.

No abstract

Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rare, but potentially fatal, immune-mediated disease of the peripheral nerves and nerve roots that is usually triggered by infections. The incidence of GBS can therefore increase during outbreaks of infectious diseases, as was seen during the Zika virus epidemics in 2013 in French Polynesia and 2015 in Latin America. Diagnosis and management of GBS can be complicated as its clinical presentation and disease course are heterogeneous, and no international clinical guidelines are currently available. To support clinicians, especially in the context of an outbreak, we have developed a globally applicable guideline for the diagnosis and management of GBS. The guideline is based on current literature and expert consensus, and has a ten-step structure to facilitate its use in clinical practice. We first provide an introduction to the diagnostic criteria, clinical variants and differential diagnoses of GBS. The ten steps then cover early recognition and diagnosis of GBS, admission to the intensive care unit, treatment indication and selection, monitoring and treatment of disease progression, prediction of clinical course and outcome, and management of complications and sequelae.

No abstract

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, crossover trial compared a six week course of oral prednisolone tapering from 60 mg to 10 mg daily with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) 2.0 g/kg given over one to two days for treating chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). Twenty-four of the thirty-two randomized patients completed both treatment periods. Both treatments produced significant improvements in the primary outcome measure, change in an 11-point disability scale two weeks after randomization. There was slightly, but not significantly, more improvement after IVIg than with prednisolone, the mean difference between the groups in change in disability grade being 0.16 (95% CI = -0.35 to 0.66). There were also slightly, but not significantly, greater improvements favoring IVIg in the secondary outcome measures: time to walk 10 meters after two weeks and improvement in disability grade after six weeks. Results may have been biased against IVIg by the eight patients who did not complete the second arm of the trial. A serious adverse event (psychosis) attributable to treatment occurred in one patient while on prednisolone and in none with IVIg.

No abstract

Background There are two types of diabetes. Type 1 diabetes affects younger people and needs treatment with insulin injections. Type 2 diabetes affects older people and can usually be treated by diet and oral drugs. Diabetic neuropathy affects 10% of patients with diabetes mellitus at diagnosis and 40% to 50% after 10 years. Enhanced glucose control is the best studied intervention for the prevention of this disabling condition but there have been no systematic reviews of the evidence. Objectives To examine the evidence for enhanced glucose control in the prevention of distal symmetric polyneuropathy in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (30 January 2012), CENTRAL (2012, Issue 1), MED-LINE (1966 to January 2012) and EMBASE (1980 to January 2012) for randomized controlled trials of enhanced glucose control in diabetes mellitus. Selection criteria We included all randomized, controlled studies investigating enhanced glycemic control that reported neuropathy outcomes after at least one year of intervention. Our primary outcome measure was annual development of clinical neuropathy defined by a clinical scale. Secondary outcomes included motor nerve conduction velocity and quantitative vibration testing. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently reviewed all titles and abstracts identified by the database searches for inclusion. Two authors abstracted data from all included studies with a standardized form. A third author mediated conflicts. We analyzed the presence of clinical neuropathy with annualized risk differences (RDs), and conduction velocity and quantitative velocity measurements with mean differences per year. Main results This review identified 17 randomized studies that addressed whether enhanced glucose control prevents the development of neuropathy. Seven of these studies were conducted in people with type 1 diabetes, eight in type 2 diabetes, and two in both types. A meta-analysis of the two studies that reported the primary outcome (incidence of clinical neuropathy) with a total of 1228 participants with type 1 diabetes revealed a significantly reduced risk of developing clinical neuropathy in those with enhanced glucose control, an annualized RD of −1.84% (95% confidence interval (CI) −1.11 to −2.56). In a similar analysis of four studies that reported the primary outcome, involving 6669 participants with type 2 diabetes, the annualized RD of developing clinical neuropathy was −0.58% (95% CI 0.01 to −1.17). Most secondary outcomes were significantly in favor of intensive treatment in both populations. However, both types of diabetic participants also had a significant increase in severe adverse events including hypoglycemic events. Authors’ conclusions According to high-quality evidence, enhanced glucose control significantly prevents the development of clinical neuropathy and reduces nerve conduction and vibration threshold abnormalities in type 1 diabetes mellitus. In type 2 diab...