Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2022 |
Other Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | eng |
Source: | Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
Download full: | http://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4889 |
Summary: | Introduction: The treatment of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) or plasma exchange (PE) reduces time to clinical recovery. Although sometimes used in clinical practice, the benefit of a second treatment cycle is of unproven benefit. Aims: Our aim was to compare GBS prognosis in patients treated with one or two cycles of IVIg or PE. Methods: We selected patients with electrophysiological studies compatible with acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy or acute motor-sensory axonal neuropathy, from January 2018 to December 2020 in our hospital. Our primary outcome was any improvement in the Guillain-Barré Syndrome Disability Score (GBS-DS) at a mean of twelve weeks. We compared patients treated with one or two treatment cycles with a binary regression. Results: We included twenty-six patients, 65.4% with the classical presentation and 30.8% were treated with two cycles. Patients treated with two cycles presented a higher basal GBS-DS (median 4; IQR 1-5) compared with the group of patients treated with one cycle (median 3; IQR 1-5), p = 0.01. The remaining basal characteristics were similar between groups. The two-cycle treatment regimen did not associate with an improvement in GBS-DS (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03-2.35, p = 0.24). Likewise there was no benefit in the need for intensive care unit (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.37-10.92, p = 0.42) or mechanical invasive ventilation (OR 10.2, 95% CI 0.86-120.96, p = 0.66). Discussion: Our analysis reinforces the recent literature data regarding the absence of benefit of two treatment cycles in patients with GBS. |
id |
RCAP_5847e6993aba0a2827f0fe8d596442e4 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.chlc.pt:10400.17/4889 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository_id_str |
https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160 |
spelling |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational StudyHSJ NEUGuillain-Barre Syndrome* / drug therapyImmunoglobulins, Intravenous* / therapeutic usePlasma ExchangePlasmapheresisPrognosisIntroduction: The treatment of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) or plasma exchange (PE) reduces time to clinical recovery. Although sometimes used in clinical practice, the benefit of a second treatment cycle is of unproven benefit. Aims: Our aim was to compare GBS prognosis in patients treated with one or two cycles of IVIg or PE. Methods: We selected patients with electrophysiological studies compatible with acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy or acute motor-sensory axonal neuropathy, from January 2018 to December 2020 in our hospital. Our primary outcome was any improvement in the Guillain-Barré Syndrome Disability Score (GBS-DS) at a mean of twelve weeks. We compared patients treated with one or two treatment cycles with a binary regression. Results: We included twenty-six patients, 65.4% with the classical presentation and 30.8% were treated with two cycles. Patients treated with two cycles presented a higher basal GBS-DS (median 4; IQR 1-5) compared with the group of patients treated with one cycle (median 3; IQR 1-5), p = 0.01. The remaining basal characteristics were similar between groups. The two-cycle treatment regimen did not associate with an improvement in GBS-DS (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03-2.35, p = 0.24). Likewise there was no benefit in the need for intensive care unit (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.37-10.92, p = 0.42) or mechanical invasive ventilation (OR 10.2, 95% CI 0.86-120.96, p = 0.66). Discussion: Our analysis reinforces the recent literature data regarding the absence of benefit of two treatment cycles in patients with GBS.ElsevierRepositório da Unidade Local de Saúde São JoséFaustino, PCoutinho, MBrum, MMedeiros, LLadeira, F2024-05-03T14:43:07Z2022-102022-10-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4889eng10.1016/j.jns.2022.120368info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2025-03-06T16:49:41Zoai:repositorio.chlc.pt:10400.17/4889Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-29T00:20:28.409541Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
title |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
spellingShingle |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study Faustino, P HSJ NEU Guillain-Barre Syndrome* / drug therapy Immunoglobulins, Intravenous* / therapeutic use Plasma Exchange Plasmapheresis Prognosis |
title_short |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
title_full |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
title_fullStr |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
title_full_unstemmed |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
title_sort |
Outcomes in Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following a Second Therapeutic Cycle – A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study |
author |
Faustino, P |
author_facet |
Faustino, P Coutinho, M Brum, M Medeiros, L Ladeira, F |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Coutinho, M Brum, M Medeiros, L Ladeira, F |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Repositório da Unidade Local de Saúde São José |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Faustino, P Coutinho, M Brum, M Medeiros, L Ladeira, F |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
HSJ NEU Guillain-Barre Syndrome* / drug therapy Immunoglobulins, Intravenous* / therapeutic use Plasma Exchange Plasmapheresis Prognosis |
topic |
HSJ NEU Guillain-Barre Syndrome* / drug therapy Immunoglobulins, Intravenous* / therapeutic use Plasma Exchange Plasmapheresis Prognosis |
description |
Introduction: The treatment of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) or plasma exchange (PE) reduces time to clinical recovery. Although sometimes used in clinical practice, the benefit of a second treatment cycle is of unproven benefit. Aims: Our aim was to compare GBS prognosis in patients treated with one or two cycles of IVIg or PE. Methods: We selected patients with electrophysiological studies compatible with acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy or acute motor-sensory axonal neuropathy, from January 2018 to December 2020 in our hospital. Our primary outcome was any improvement in the Guillain-Barré Syndrome Disability Score (GBS-DS) at a mean of twelve weeks. We compared patients treated with one or two treatment cycles with a binary regression. Results: We included twenty-six patients, 65.4% with the classical presentation and 30.8% were treated with two cycles. Patients treated with two cycles presented a higher basal GBS-DS (median 4; IQR 1-5) compared with the group of patients treated with one cycle (median 3; IQR 1-5), p = 0.01. The remaining basal characteristics were similar between groups. The two-cycle treatment regimen did not associate with an improvement in GBS-DS (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03-2.35, p = 0.24). Likewise there was no benefit in the need for intensive care unit (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.37-10.92, p = 0.42) or mechanical invasive ventilation (OR 10.2, 95% CI 0.86-120.96, p = 0.66). Discussion: Our analysis reinforces the recent literature data regarding the absence of benefit of two treatment cycles in patients with GBS. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-10 2022-10-01T00:00:00Z 2024-05-03T14:43:07Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4889 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4889 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1016/j.jns.2022.120368 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
collection |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
info@rcaap.pt |
_version_ |
1833600495234580480 |