Guillain-Barre syndrome presenting with sensory disturbance following a herpes virus infection: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>We present a case of an unusual clinical manifestation of Guillain-Barre syndrome following a pre-existing herpes virus infection. Although there have been several reports describing the co-existence of herpes virus infection and Guillain-Barre syndrome, we undertook a more in-depth study of the cross-reactivity between herpes viruses and recommend a follow-up study based on serology tests.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 39-year-old healthy Caucasian man with Guillain-Barre syndrome presented to our facility initially with sensory disturbance, followed by an atypical descending pattern of clinical progression. On physical examination, our patient showed hot and cold temperature sensory disturbance under the T4 vertebrae level, symmetrically diminished muscle power mainly to his lower limbs, blurred vision, a loss of taste and paresis and diminished reflexes of his lower limbs. Serology test results for common viruses on hospital admission were positive for cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin M, cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin G, herpes simplex virus immunoglobulin M, herpes simplex virus immunoglobulin G, Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin M, and varicella zoster virus immunoglobulin G, borderline for Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin G and negative for varicella zoster virus immunoglobulin M. At one month after hospital admission his test results were positive for cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin M, cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin G, herpes simplex virus immunoglobulin G, Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin G, varicella zoster virus immunoglobulin G, borderline for herpes simplex virus immunoglobulin M and negative for Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin M and varicella zoster virus immunoglobulin M. At his six month follow-up, tests were positive for cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin G, herpes simplex virus immunoglobulin M, herpes simplex virus immunoglobulin G, Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin G and varicella zoster virus immunoglobulin G and negative for cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin M, Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin M and varicella zoster virus immunoglobulin M.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The clinical manifestation of Guillain-Barre syndrome in our patient followed a combined herpes virus infection. The cross-reactivity between these human herpes viruses may have a pathogenic as well as evolutionary significance. Our patient showed seroconversion at an early stage of Epstein-Barr virus immunoglobulin M to immunoglobulin G antibodies, suggesting that Epstein-Barr virus might have been the cause of this syndrome. Even if this case is not the first of its kind to be reported, it may contribute to a better understanding of the disease and the cross-reaction mechanisms of herpes virus infections. This case report may have a broader clinical impact across more than one area of medicine, suggesting that cooperation between different specialties is always in the patient's best interest.</p

IVIG Treatment and Prognosis in Guillain–Barré Syndrome

Introduction Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute, immune-mediated polyneuropathy that often leads to severe weakness. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is a proven effective treatment for GBS (class 1 evidence). However, about 25% of patients need artificial ventilation and 20% are still unable to walk unaided after 6 months. Important clinical factors associated with poor outcome are age, presence of preceding diarrhea and the severity of disability in the early course of disease. These clinical factors were combined in a clinical prognostic scoring scale, the Erasmus GBS Outcome Scale (EGOS). Materials and Methods GBS patients being unable to walk unaided are currently treated with a standard single IVIg dose (0.4 g/kg bodyweight for 5 days). A recent retrospective study in 174 GBS patients enrolled in one of our randomized controlled clinical trials showed that patients with a minor increase of serum IgG level after standard single IVIg dose recovered significantly slower. Additionally, fewer patients reached the ability to walk unaided at six months after correction for the known clinical prognostic factors (multivariate analysis; P<0.022). Discussion It is yet unknown why some GBS patients only have a minor increase after standard IVIg treatment. By using the EGOS it is possible to select GBS patients with a poor prognosis. These patients potentially may benefit from a second IVIg dose. Conclusion A standard dose of IVIG is not sufficiently effective in many GBS patients. Whether these patients might benefit from a second IVIg dose needs further investigation

Personal Papers (MS 80-0002)

Document describes the New York County Medical Society plan including the need for a service, collecting blood, donors, processing, and distribution

Randomised trial of plasma exchange, intravenous immunoglobulin, and combined treatments in Guillain-Barré syndrome

The relative efficacy of plasma exchange (PE) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) for the treatment of Guillain-Barré syndrome has not been established. We compared PE with IVIg, and with a combined regimen of PE followed by IVIg, in an international, multicentre, randomised trial of 383 adult patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome. The patients were randomly assigned PE (five 50 mL/kg exchanges over 8-13 days), IVIg (Sandoglobulin, 0.4 g/kg daily for 5 days), or the PE course immediately followed by the IVIg course. The inclusion criteria were severe disease (aid needed for walking) and onset of neuropathic symptoms within the previous 14 days. Patients were followed up for 48 weeks. Four patients were excluded because they did not meet the randomisation criteria. All the remaining 379 patients were assessed for the major outcome criterion-change on a seven-point disability grade scale-by an observer unaware of treatment assignment, 4 weeks after randomisation. At that time, the mean improvement was 0.9 (SD 1.3) in the 121 PE-group patients, 0.8 (1.3) in the 130 IVIg-group patients, and 1.1 (1.4) in the 128 patients who received both treatments (intention-to-treat analysis). None of the differences between the groups for this major outcome criterion was significant. The difference between PE alone and IVIg alone was so small that a 0.5 grade difference was excluded at the 95% level of confidence. There was no significant difference between any of the treatment groups in the secondary outcome measures: time to recovery of unaided walking, time to discontinuation of ventilation, and trend describing the recovery from disability up to 48 weeks. There was a non-significant trend towards a more favourable outcome on some outcome measures with combined treatment. In treatment of severe Guillain-Barré syndrome during the first 2 weeks after onset of neuropathic symptoms, PE and IVIg had equivalent efficacy. The combination of PE with IVIg did not confer a significant advantage