2019
DOI: 10.1212/nxi.0000000000000567
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strategies for treatment of childhood primary angiitis of the central nervous system

Abstract: ObjectiveChildhood primary angiitis of the CNS (cPACNS) is a devastating neurologic disease. No standardized treatment protocols exist, and evidence is limited to open-label cohort studies and case reports. The aim of this review is to summarize the literature and provide informed treatment recommendations.MethodsA scoping review of cPACNS literature from January 2000 to December 2018 was conducted using Ovid, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Contro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The paucity of evidence for treatment is in part due to small patient numbers and therefore reduced interest by industry and funding bodies, and the fact that "standard-ofcare" approaches are considered effective and the introduction of "placebo controls" would be unethical. Currently, diagnostic approaches and classification of cPACNS relies on suggested, but nor prospectively evaluated criteria, and treatment is based on mostly retrospective and relatively small case series and/or expert opinion (10). In such situations, establishing consensus on diagnostic and treatment plans to harmonize approaches and prospectively collect meaningful clinical datasets in relation to consensus treatment plans can be a helpful tool to generate evidence and allow improvement of outcomes in patients with rare diseases (11,(15)(16)(17).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The paucity of evidence for treatment is in part due to small patient numbers and therefore reduced interest by industry and funding bodies, and the fact that "standard-ofcare" approaches are considered effective and the introduction of "placebo controls" would be unethical. Currently, diagnostic approaches and classification of cPACNS relies on suggested, but nor prospectively evaluated criteria, and treatment is based on mostly retrospective and relatively small case series and/or expert opinion (10). In such situations, establishing consensus on diagnostic and treatment plans to harmonize approaches and prospectively collect meaningful clinical datasets in relation to consensus treatment plans can be a helpful tool to generate evidence and allow improvement of outcomes in patients with rare diseases (11,(15)(16)(17).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While patients with transient pPACNS can exhibit mild clinical symptoms indicative of focal neurological deficits, patients with progressive pPACNS usually present with symptoms of both focal and diffuse neurological deficits, including cognitive impairment, headaches and in some cases seizures ( 10 , 22 , 23 ). As 80.8% of participants agreed with the aforementioned approach to stratify patients by likely risk for disease progression and classified case 2 as transient p-cPACNS (81.4%), it appears surprising that 69.9% also stated that case 1 with posterior arteries affected may have transient disease.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…No management guidelines were available for cPACNS, but a review by Beelen et al . [ 21 ] suggested a treatment strategy depending on phenotype, consisting of induction pulse corticosteroid therapy followed by maintenance for 6 months, along with early initiation of monthly cyclophosphamide and IVIg, which we believe provided a favorable overall outcome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%