Search

Long lists of causes of peripheral neuropathy make peripheral nerve disease a dry and uninspiring subject. A simple scheme based on the answers to just six questions should enable the clinician to recognise characteristic patterns, investigate relevant subgroups appropriately, and identify treatable disorders quickly: which systems are involved? What is the distribution of weakness? What is the nature of the sensory involvement? Is there any evidence of upper motor neuron involvement? What is the temporal evolution? Is there any evidence for a hereditary neuropathy? Standard screening investigations suffice for the common length dependent axonal neuropathies while complex presentations need more detailed investigations targeted to their clinical phenotype.

Human and animal studies on antibody-mediated neuropathy implicate complement in pathogenesis. In animal models complement inhibition is therapeutically beneficial. The monoclonal antibody, eculizumab (Soliris™, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Cheshire, CT), prevents cleavage of C5 and thus inhibits terminal complement activation. In an open label study, 13 multifocal motor neuropathy patients received eculizumab for 14 weeks, 10 of whom were concomitantly receiving intravenous immunoglobulin. The primary outcome was safety of eculizumab, and the secondary outcomes included change in intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) dosing frequency, performance, and electrophysiological parameters. Adverse events were minor during the study. Nine of 10 patients on IVIg maintenance continued to require IVIg. IVIg dosing interval was not different between the run-in and the treatment period. There were improvements in patient-rated subjective scores and selected clinical and electrophysiological measurements. Overall, a small treatment effect occurred in some patients that appeared supplementary to and independent of the IVIg treatment effect, and occurred more frequently in patients with higher baseline motor function., (© 2011 Peripheral Nerve Society.)

Long lists of causes of peripheral neuropathy make peripheral nerve disease a dry and uninspiring subject. A simple scheme based on the answers to just six questions should enable the clinician to recognise characteristic patterns, investigate relevant subgroups appropriately, and identify treatable disorders quickly: which systems are involved? What is the distribution of weakness? What is the nature of the sensory involvement? Is there any evidence of upper motor neuron involvement? What is the temporal evolution? Is there any evidence for a hereditary neuropathy? Standard screening investigations suffice for the common length dependent axonal neuropathies while complex presentations need more detailed investigations targeted to their clinical phenotype.

Background: Fisher syndrome is one of the regional variants of Guillain-Barré syndrome, characterised by impairment of eye movements (ophthalmoplegia), incoordination (ataxia) and loss of tendon reflexes (areflexia). It can occur in more limited forms, and may overlap with Guillain-Barré syndrome. A further variant is associated with upper motor neuron signs and disturbance of consciousness (Bickerstaff's brainstem encephalitis). All of these variants are associated with anti-GQ1b IgG antibodies. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) and plasma exchange are often used as treatments in this patient group. This review was undertaken to systematically assess any available randomised controlled data on acute immunomodulatory therapies in Fisher Syndrome or its variants., Objectives: To provide the best available evidence from randomised controlled trials on the role of acute immunomodulatory therapy in the treatment of Fisher Syndrome and related disorders., Search Strategy: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Trials register (March 2004), MEDLINE (from January 1966 to November 2004), EMBASE (from January 1980 to November 2004), CINAHL (from January 1982 to November 2004) and LILACS (from January 1982 to November 2004) for randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised trials, historically controlled studies and trials with concurrent controls. We adapted this strategy to search MEDLINE from 1966 and EMBASE from 1980 for comparative cohort studies, case-control studies and case series., Selection Criteria: All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials (in which allocation was not random but was intended to be unbiased, e.g. alternate allocation, and non-randomised controlled studies were to have been selected. Since no such clinical trials were discovered, all retrospective case series containing five or more patients were assessed and summarised in the discussion section., Data Collection and Analysis: All studies of Fisher Syndrome and its clinical variants were scrutinised for data on patients treated with any form of acute immunotherapy. Information on the outcome was then collated and summarised., Main Results: We found no randomised or non-randomised prospective controlled trials of immunotherapy in Fisher Syndrome or related disorders. We summarised the results of retrospective series containing five or more patients in the discussion section., Authors' Conclusions: There are no randomised controlled trials of immunomodulatory therapy in Fisher Syndrome or related disorders on which to base practice.

Background and Purpose: Blood pressure reduction is central to secondary prevention after stroke, but the optimal time to start therapy is unknown. Cerebral autoregulation is impaired early after ischaemic insult, and any changes in systemic blood pressure may be reflected in cerebral perfusion. However, early initiation in hospital may better assure continued long-term treatment. We have investigated the effect of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril on blood pressure, global and focal cerebral blood flow (CBF) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in a normotensive acute stroke population., Methods: Twenty-five patients within 4-8 days of mild ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack and with diastolic blood pressure 70-90 mm Hg were randomized to receive perindopril 2 or 4 mg daily versus placebo according to estimated GFR. Mean arterial blood pressure (MABP), internal carotid artery (ICA) flow and middle cerebral artery velocity (MCAv) were measured prior to dosing, over the following 24 h and at 2 weeks. Brain hexamethyl propylene amino oxide single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) was performed before dosing and at estimated time of peak drug effect (6-8 h after first dose). GFR measurement using a (51)Cr-ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid technique was undertaken prior to medication and repeated at 2 weeks., Results: MABP was reduced throughout the first 24 h with a mean MABP reduction of 9.3 mm Hg (95% CI 7.4-11.3 mm Hg), maximal placebo corrected fall of 12.5 mm Hg at 10 h post-dose, p = 0.005. No significant change occurred in ICA flow, MCAv or CBF measured by SPECT: change from baseline in symptomatic hemisphere CBF was -0.02 (SD 3.11) ml/100 g/min (treated group) compared with 0 (SD 3.01) (placebo group). Similarly, no significant change was observed in cortical CBF. Mean within-group change in GFR was 2.7 +/- 10.1 in the treated group and -4.3 +/- 6.7 in the placebo group (p = NS)., Discussion: Antihypertensive therapy with perindopril may be introduced in the first week after mild ischaemic stroke in normotensive patients without affecting global or regional CBF or affecting GFR., (Copyright (c) 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objective: To examine the association between patent foramen ovale (PFO) and atrial septal aneurysm (ASA) and stroke., Method: Data from case-control studies that examined the relative frequency of PFO, ASA, or both, in all patients with ischemic stroke, cryptogenic stroke, and known stroke cause as well as control subjects were included. Trials were categorized by age, clinical comparison, and abnormality. Combined OR were calculated using fixed effect (FE) and random effect (RE) methods., Results: Comparing patients with ischemic stroke with control subjects using RE, OR for all ages was 1.83 (95% CI, 1.25 to 2.66) for PFO (15 studies), 2.35 (95% CI, 1.46 to 3.77) for ASA (nine studies), and 4.96 (95% CI, 2.37 to 10.39) for PFO plus ASA (four studies). Homogeneous results were found within the group younger than age 55: using FE, OR was 3.10 (95% CI, 2.29 to 4.21) for PFO, 6.14 (95% CI, 2.47 to 15.22) for ASA, and 15.59 (95% CI, 2.83 to 85.87) for PFO plus ASA. For patients older than age 55, using FE, OR was 1.27 (95% CI, 0.80 to 2.01) for PFO, 3.43 (95% CI, 1.89 to 6.22) for ASA, and 5.09 (95% CI, 1.25 to 20.74) for PFO plus ASA. Comparing cryptogenic stroke with known stroke cause, heterogeneous results were derived from total group examination using RE: OR was 3.16 (95% CI, 2.30 to 4.35) for PFO (22 studies), 3.65 (95% CI, 1.34 to 9.97) for ASA (five studies), and 23.26 (95% CI, 5.24 to 103.20) for PFO plus ASA (two studies). In patients younger than age 55, using FE the OR was 6.00 (95% CI, 3.72 to 9.68) for PFO; only one study examined ASA or PFO plus ASA. In patients aged 55 years or older, three studies produced heterogeneous results for PFO: using RE, OR was 2.26 (95% CI, 0.96 to 5.31); no data were available on ASA prevalence., Conclusions: PFO and ASA are significantly associated with ischemic stroke in patients younger than 55 years. Further studies are needed to establish whether an association exists between PFO and ischemic stroke in those older than 55.