Search

Peripheral neuropathy is a common neurological disorder. There may be important differences and similarities in the diagnosis of peripheral neuropathy between North America (NA) and South America (SA). Neuromuscular databases were searched for neuropathy diagnosis at two North American sites, University of Kansas Medical Center and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and one South American site, Federal Fluminense University in Brazil. All patients were included into one of the six major categories: immune-mediated, diabetic, hereditary, infectious/inflammatory, systemic/metabolic/toxic (not diabetic) and cryptogenic. A comparison of the number of patients in each category was made between North America and South America databases. Total number of cases in North America was 1090 and in South America was 1034 [immune-mediated: NA 215 (19.7%), SA 191 (18%); diabetic: NA 148 (13.5%), SA 236 (23%); hereditary: NA 292 (26.7%), SA 103 (10%); infectious/inflammatory: NA 53 (4.8%), SA 141 (14%); systemic/metabolic/toxic: NA 71 (6.5%), SA 124 (12%); cryptogenic: NA 311 (28.5%), SA 239 (23%)]. Some specific neuropathy comparisons were hereditary neuropathies [Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) cases] in NA 246/292 (84.2%) and SA 60/103 (58%); familial amyloid neuropathy in SA 31/103 (30%) and none in NA. Among infectious neuropathies, cases of human T-lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) neuropathy in SA were 36/141(25%), Chagas disease in SA were 13/141(9%) and none for either in NA; cases of neuropathy due to leprosy in NA were 26/53 (49%) and in SA were 39/141(28%). South American tertiary care centers are more likely to see patients with infectious, diabetic and hereditary disorders such as familial amyloid neuropathies. North American tertiary centers are more likely to see patients with CMT. Immune neuropathies and cryptogenic neuropathies were seen equally in North America and South America.

Fibromyalgia (FM) patients present with widespread chronic pain and other symptoms. Some studies in the literature have reported inconsistent results after a Qigong exercise intervention in patients with FM. The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of a home-based Qigong exercise in patients with FM.A total of 14 subjects were randomly assigned into one of two groups. The experimental group went through a six-week Qigong exercise program involving meditation, deep breathing, and synchronized rhythmic body movements. The control group took part in a sham Qigong exercise program using the same body movements also for six weeks. Clinical assessments at baseline and end of intervention used the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire.Group mean scores of four measurements were significantly (p.0125) reduced in the intervention group, but not in the control group. The percentage changes in the four measurements were 44.2%, 24.8%, 37.3%, and 44.3% in the intervention group, and 10.1%, 6.3%, 9.9%, and 11.8% in the control group.Qigong exercise may potentially be an effective self-management approach in controlling FM symptoms. In this pilot study, regular daily Qigong exercise, accumulated number of exercise sessions, and the specific form of Qigong exercise may all be important factors for the significant improvement in the study subjects. Future research is required to determine whether the same benefit can be obtained in a larger sample.

The primary aims of our study were to compare pregabalin and duloxetine in a neuromuscular clinic for diabetic neuropathic pain (DPN) and to study the effect of these medications in cryptogenic sensory polyneuropathy. We performed a retrospective chart review of 143 patients who were started on pregabalin or duloxetine during a 10-month period in a tertiary neuromuscular outpatient center for neuropathic pain. Duloxetine and pregabalin were started in 103 and 91 patients, respectively. Ninety-two patients tried only one of the two medications while both medications were used at different time periods in 51 patients. Follow-up was available for 87 patients on pregabalin and 89 patients on duloxetine. More patients with neuropathic pain reported an improvement with pregabalin (33%) than duloxetine (21%). Duloxetine (38%) had a higher frequency of side effects compared to pregabalin (30%). However, these differences between pregabalin and duloxetine were not statistically significant. Despite the study's limitations of retrospective design, these findings suggest that both pregabalin and duloxetine are probably effective for neuropathic pain, secondary to diabetes or cryptogenic sensory peripheral neuropathy in a tertiary care academic neuromuscular center. Prospective randomized controlled comparative effectiveness studies are required for both drugs in the treatment of neuropathic pain.