淋巴血浆置换治疗Guillain-Barre综合征的疗效观察

目的 观察淋巴血浆置换(LPE)治疗Guillain-Barre综合征(GBS)的疗效.方法 对34例GBS患者(LPE组)在常规治疗基础上加用LPE治疗,观察肌力开始恢复时间、治疗前后肌力评分差值及临床疗效和不良反应,并与17例加用血浆置换(TPE)治疗的GBS患者(TPE组)进行比较.结果 LPE组共接受LPE 51次,平均1.5次/例;TPE组共接受TPE治疗33次,平均1.9次/例.LPE组治疗后肌力开始恢复时间为(12.74±7.18)d,显著早于TPE组[(24.35±14.22)d](P<0.05);治疗前后的肢体肌力评分差值大于TPE组(均P<0.05),疗效为进步者(24例)多于TPE组(7例),无效者(2例)少于TPE组(8例),总有效率(94.12%)高于TPE组(52.94%)(P<0.001);平均住院(23.47±12.91)d,短于TPE组的(48.12±39.08)d;差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).LPE组不良反应有荨麻疹(4例)和低血压(2例),均轻微,对症处理后缓解,不良反应发生率为11.8%,与TPE组(21.2%)比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05). 结论 LPE治疗GBS疗效显著,不良反应少,是一种安全、有效的治疗方法,值得临床推广应用.     

短程大剂量糖皮质激素冲击联合其他免疫抑制剂治疗重症肌无力的疗效观察

目的评价短程大剂量糖皮质激素(GCS)冲击联合其他免疫抑制剂治疗重症肌无力(MG)的疗效及安全性。方法回顾性分析作者医院2003-11-2011-2期间住院的40例应用短程大剂量GCS冲击联合其他免疫抑制剂治疗MG患者的疗效和不良反应,比较不同治疗时段、性别、起病年龄、临床类型、免疫抑制剂的疗效。结果与治疗前比较,所有病例在短程大剂量GCS冲击联合其他免疫抑制剂治疗4周时临床绝对评分显著改善(6.88±6.97 vs.24.50±10.78,P0.01),治疗12个月时与治疗4周时临床绝对评分无统计学差异(7.22±10.39 vs.6.88±6.97,P0.05);治疗4周时的相对评分69.00%±27.53%、有效率92.50%,治疗12个月时的相对评分70.00%±39.35%、有效率87.50%。其治疗4周时与治疗12个月时的有效率在不同性别、起病年龄、眼肌型/全身型的比较中均无统计学差异(P0.05)。治疗4周时环孢素组的有效率优于硫唑嘌呤组(P0.05),治疗12个月时此2组有效率无统计学差异(P0.05)。结论短程大剂量GCS冲击联合免疫抑制剂治疗可显著改善MG患者临床表现。     

双重滤过血浆置换治疗吉兰-巴雷综合征的疗效分析

目的 探讨双重滤过血浆置换(DFPP)治疗吉兰-巴雷综合征(GBS)的疗效及临床意义。方法 回顾性分析2020年6月至2021年9月上海市第六人民医院神经内科确诊的GBS患者20例,9例接受DFPP治疗(DFPP组),其中女5例,男4例;11例接受丙种球蛋白(IVIG)治疗(IVIG组),其中女7例,男4例。采用GBS残障量表(GBS-DS)和改良Barthel指数评估量表(MBI)评估患者神经功能。比较两组患者治疗前、治疗后2周、治疗后2个月的神经功能变化。对于严重GBS患者,以GBS-DS评分<3分或MBI>70分定义为神经功能恢复良好。结果 与治疗前比较,DFPP组和IVIG组GBS患者治疗后2周及2个月GBS-DS评分下降,MBI评分上升(均P<0.01),而两组治疗后2周与治疗后2个月间比较均无统计学差异(均P>0.05)。IVIG组与DFPP组患者间比较,治疗后2周及2个月GBS-DS评分和MBI评分均无统计学差异(均P>0.05)。对于重症GBS患者,DFPP组4例重症患者治疗后2周时2例恢复良好,2例恢复不良,治疗后2个月时4例均恢复良好;...     

文拉法辛联合心理干预治疗帕金森病合并抑郁症的疗效

目的探讨文拉法辛联合心理干预治疗帕金森病合并抑郁症的疗效。方法 120例符合纳入标准的帕金森病合并抑郁症患者随机分为2组,每组各60例。对照组给予文拉法辛治疗,观察组在对照组的基础上联合采用心理干预治疗。比较2组患者临床疗效、MMSE评分及生活质量改善情况。结果观察组总有效率为96.7%,明显高于对照组的80.0%。观察组治疗2周、4周和8周后的MMSE评分均明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P均0.05)。观察组生理机制、躯体疼痛、一般健康状况、精力、社会功能、情感反应及精神健康评分明显高于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P均0.05),而生理机制评分2组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论文拉法辛联合心理干预治疗帕金森病合并抑郁症疗效可靠,可提高治疗总有效率,改善认知功能,并提高患者生活质量,值得临床推广。     

中等剂量地塞米松与甲强龙冲击治疗重症肌无力疗效观察

目的比较中等剂量地塞米松与大剂量甲强龙冲击治疗后,小剂量强的松维持治疗重症肌无力的疗效及安全性,探讨糖皮质激素治疗重症肌无力的最佳剂量及副作用。方法将43例成人全身型重症肌无力患者分为A、B两组,A组为中等剂量地塞米松加小剂量强的松维持治疗组,共30例;B组为大剂量甲强龙冲击治疗后加小剂量强的松维持治疗组,共13例。治疗前及治疗后1 m、3 m根据重症肌无力定量评分量表(quantitive MG score,QMGs)分别进行评分以判定疗效,同时记录激素相关不良反应。结果 A组与B组治疗后1 m有效率分别为83%及85%;治疗后3 m有效率均为100%;治疗后3 m痊愈+基本痊愈率分别为50%及30%,上述差异均无统计学意义。应用激素早期(4~10 d)症状加重评分分别为(0.77±1.04)及(0.70±0.95),P>0.05;3 m内不良反应发生率分别为14%及24%,P<0.05。结论中等剂量地塞米松加小剂量强的松维持治疗方案与甲强龙冲击治疗加小剂量强的松维持方案治疗效果相当,但前者不良反应发生率更低,更宜于在临床中推广。     

艾司西酞普兰联合层级护理模式治疗伴焦虑的抑郁障碍患者研究

目的:探讨艾司西酞普兰联合层级护理模式治疗伴焦虑的抑郁障碍患者的临床疗效。方法:将84例伴焦虑的抑郁障碍患者随机分为干预组(42例)和对照组(42例),干预组采用艾司西酞普兰联合层级护理模式治疗,对照组给予艾司西酞普兰合并常规护理治疗,治疗6周。治疗前、治疗后1、2及6周进行汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD-17)、汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)以及世界卫生组织生存量表(WHOQL-BREF)评分,比较两组患者的临床疗效。结果:治疗6周末,干预组总有效率为90.48%,对照组为85.71%,两组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。干预组HAMD-17评分和HAMA评分治疗后2周分别为(12.65±3.41)和(12.67±8.13)均低于对照组[分别为(17.40±4.40)和(16.50±4.40)],差异均有统计学意义(P均0.05)。干预组和对照组治疗前后WHOQL-BREF评分分别为(54.35±6.63)和(56.85±6.81)分,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:艾司西酞普兰联合层级护理模式治疗伴焦虑的抑郁障碍起效更快。     

灯盏花素联合银杏达莫注射液治疗缺血性脑梗死的疗效及协同作用分析

目的分析灯盏花素联合银杏达莫注射液治疗缺血性脑梗死的临床疗效与协同作用。方法选取我院2012-12—2014-12收治的100例缺血性脑梗死患者为研究对象,按随机数字表法分为对照组与观察组各50例。对照组给予银杏达莫注射液治疗,观察组则采用灯盏花素联合银杏达莫注射液治疗,2组均治疗4周,采取神经缺损功能评分量表(NFDS)评估患者神经功能恢复情况,采用日常生活活动能力量表(Barthel指数)评价患者日常生活能力恢复状况。结果观察组总有效率为84.00%,对照组为56.00%,2组对比差异有统计学意义(P0.05);治疗1周、2周、4周后观察组NFDS评分分别为(11.31±5.63)分、(8.21±5.21)分、(6.13±5.37)分,与对照组相比差异有统计学意义(P0.05);治疗1周、2周、4周后观察组Barthel指数评分分别为(35.57±10.66)分、(39.11±11.34)分、(43.55±12.71)分,与对照组相比差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论在缺血性脑梗死患者临床治疗中,采用灯盏花素联合银杏达莫注射液治疗,临床效果好,患者神经功能及日常生活能力改善明显,值得推广。     

盐酸帕罗西汀治疗帕金森合并抑郁和焦虑患者的疗效及安全性

目的探讨盐酸帕罗西汀在帕金森病(PD)合并抑郁和焦虑症患者中的应用疗效及安全性。方法选取于我院接受住院治疗的80例PD合并抑郁和焦虑症患者为研究对象,随机将患者分为对照组和实验组,每组各40例。两组均以抗PD常规疗法治疗,实验组在此基础上加用盐酸帕罗西汀片20mg/d治疗6周评估两组患者治疗前后抑郁量表(HAMD)、帕金森病综合评分表(UPDRS)及焦虑量表(HAMA)评分情况以及不良反应情况。结果两组患者治疗前UPDRS、HAMD及HAMA评分组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。治疗2周、4周、6周后两组的UPDRS、HAMD及HAMA评分均有明显下降,且每次实验组患者上述量表评分下降程度较对照组更明显,上述差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。治疗6周后,实验组患者帕金森、抑郁及焦虑症状总有效率分别为82%、80%和76%,对照组患者总有效率分别为58%、68%及64%,两组相比差异显著(P0.05)。两组患者在治疗过程中均未见严重不良反应,且组间无明显差异(P0.05)。结论盐酸帕罗西汀片联合PD常规疗法用于PD合并抑郁和焦虑患者能取得更好疗效,更有效地改善患者抑郁焦虑症状,且不良反应较小。     

甲基强的松龙冲击疗法治疗放射性脑水肿的疗效

目的 探讨甲基强的松龙（MP）冲击疗法治疗放射性脑水肿（RCE）的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析2001~2012年收治46例的RCE的临床资料。26例给予MP冲击疗法（观察组），20例给予地塞米松等传统治疗（对照组）。治疗30 d，评估临床疗效，分为显效、有效、无效、进展；总有效=显效+有效；根据中华医学会第二次全国脑血管病学术会议制定的评分标准评定神经功能缺损程度，分为基本治愈、显著进步、进步、无变化、恶化、死亡；采用修订的Barthel指数评定法评定日常生活活动能力。结果 观察组总有效率（90.91%）与对照组（72.22%）无统计学差异（P>0.05），但是显效率（36.26%）明显高于对照组（5.56%；P<0.05）。治疗后30 d，观察组神经功能评分[（8.15±3.25）分]与对照组[（7.65±3.77）分]较治疗前均明显降低（P<0.05），但两组之间无统计学差异（P>0.05）。治疗后30 d，观察组Barthel指数[（84.04±12.41）分]与对照组[（84.50±7.59）分]较治疗前均明显增高（P<0.05），但是两组之间无统计学差异（P>0.05）。观察组不良反应发生率（42.31%）与对照组（45.00%）无统计学差异（P>0.05）。结论 MP冲击疗法和传统地塞米松疗法对RCE均具有治疗作用，但MP冲击疗法对颅内压增高症状的改善更快、更明显     

吉兰-巴雷综合征患者血浆置换与注射免疫球蛋白治疗的疗效比较

目的分析血浆置换(PE)与静脉注射免疫球蛋白(IVIg)在治疗吉兰-巴雷综合征(GBS)的过程中临床疗效的差异。方法 64例GBS患者分别进行PE与IVIg治疗,观察治疗前及治疗后患者神经功能改善状况。结果 PE治疗的GBS患者神经功能改善情况优于IVIg组,且临床效果显现时间早于IVIg组,治疗2 w后两组的有效率分别是96%和79%,PE治疗效果优于IVIg组。结论 PE可有效改善患者症状,有利于患者病情的早期康复。     

CSF filtration is an effective treatment of Guillain-Barré syndrome: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare CSF filtration (CSFF) and plasma exchange (PE) in the treatment of patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). METHODS: In a prospective controlled clinical trial, 37 patients with acute GBS were randomized to receive either CSFF or PE. Inclusion criteria were fulfillment of National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke criteria and disability to walk >5 m unassisted. RESULTS: With similar baseline features in both groups (initial disability grades on the six-point grading scale of the GBS Study Group) the primary outcome variable (improvement within 28 days after randomization) was almost identical (test for equivalence p = 0.0014), the mean grade values being 0.82 in the CSFF group and 0.80 in the PE group. After 56 days, 56% (9 of 16 patients) of the CSFF group and 37% (7 of 19 patients) of the PE group had reached grade 2 (i.e., ability of unassisted walking >5 m). After 6 months, the probability to reach grade 2 was about 80% in both groups. In the CSFF group, transient pleocytosis occurred without apparent clinical complications. Clinically relevant complications were higher in the PE-treated group. CONCLUSIONS: Although the number of patients was small, the authors found that the treatment of GBS with CSFF is at least as effective as with PE. CSFF might work by removing from the CSF inflammatory mediators, autoantibodies, or other factors.     

膜式血浆置换治疗重症吉兰-巴雷综合征疗效观察

目的 观察膜式血浆置换（PE）治疗重症吉兰-巴雷综合征（GBS）的疗效。方法 回顾性分析16例应用膜式血浆置换治疗的重症吉兰-巴雷综合征患者的临床资料,比较PE开始于病后≤7d及〉7d两组患者的临床疗效;比较PE结合有创通气及无创→有创通气两种通气方法对治疗结果的影响。结果 PE开始于病后≤7d组2周时临床疗效明显优于〉7d组（P〈0．05）,无创→有创通气组治疗效果明显好于直接有创通气组（P〈0．05）。结论 即早膜式血浆置换对重症GBS疗效显著,PE结合无创→有创通气可作为治疗重症GBS的首选治疗方案。     

High dose intravenous immune globulins and plasma exchange in Guillain-Barré Syndrome

We report the effects of treatment with plasma-exchange (PE) and intravenous immune globulins (IVIg) in 36 out of 50 patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) recruited by an incidence study in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy. Comparison of the patients treated with PE and IVIg showed no significant differences in terms of effectiveness in improving the clinical course of GBS: at one month, respectively 11.1% and 25% had recovered, and 55.5% and 58.3% had improved by at least one grade. These results are in agreement with those of the Dutch GBS trial. No relapses were observed in either group. Moreover, our results showed no difference in clinical outcome at 1 and 3 months between the patients receiving only one therapy and those receiving two; a second cycle of therapy did not seem to improve the clinical course of the disease significantly. We conclude that PE and IVIg are both safe and effective therapies for GBS.     

血浆置换联合激素治疗重症神经系统脱髓鞘疾病

目的　评价血浆置换联合激素治疗重症吉兰 -巴雷综合征 ( Guillain-Barre syndrome,GBS)和多发性硬化( multiple sclerosis,MS)的临床疗效。方法　回顾性分析血浆置换联合激素治疗的 1 3例重症 GBS和 7例重症MS的临床转归及治疗后血中免疫球蛋白滴度变化。结果　患者呼吸肌麻痹于治疗后 5～ 1 4d缓解 ,2个月内临床表现缓解率分别为 GBS76.9% ,MS5 7.1 %。血中免疫球蛋白滴度明显减少 ( P <0 .0 1 )。结论　血浆置换联合激素疗法疗效肯定 ,可作为治疗急性重症神经脱髓鞘疾病首选方法。     

Factors influencing outcome in Guillain-Barré Syndrome: comparison of plasma adsorption against other treatments

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate which factors influence the outcome of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), focusing on the choice of treatments. METHODS: Sixty-three GBS patients were retrospectively studied and the following factors were evaluated: sex, age, days from onset of disease to the start of treatment, severity of symptoms, prior infection, autonomic dysfunction, bulbar palsy, anti-ganglioside antibody, and disease form, as well as the choice of treatment. Plasma adsorption (PA, n=39), plasma exchange (PE, n=14), or immunoglobulin treatment (IVIg, n=10) were performed in this study. Outcomes were evaluated using the functional grading scale (FGS) of Hughes. RESULTS: The number of days needed for one functional grade improvement was significantly longer in the elderly, the severe symptom group, and patients with acute motor axonal form, and days needed for two functional grade improvement was significantly longer in the elderly, patients with autonomic dysfunction, and acute motor axonal form. The choice of treatments (PA, PE, or IVIg) did not significantly influence the outcome as determined by both univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Although patient age, symptoms, and disease form influenced the outcome, treatment methods did not significantly influence the outcome. Since PA does not result in a risk of unknown infection, choosing a PA treatment may be justified, especially for patients (or doctors) who may be anxious about a possibility of unknown infection.     

抗痉挛治疗仪在治疗脑卒中后上肢痉挛中的作用

目的探讨抗痉挛治疗仪在治疗脑卒中后上肢痉挛中的临床效果。方法将40例脑卒中后上肢痉挛的患者随机分为两组,对照组进行常规的康复训练,治疗组在常规康复训练的基础上加用抗痉挛治疗仪进行治疗;分别采用上肢改良Ashworth量表(MAS)、疼痛视觉模拟评分法(VAS)及简化Fugl-Meyer运动功能评定量表(FMA)上肢部分对两组患者治疗前及治疗30d后上肢痉挛程度、疼痛程度及上肢运动功能的变化进行比较。结果治疗前两组MAS分级,VAS评分及FMA评分比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。治疗后两组MAS分级及VAS评分显著低于治疗前(P0.05),且治疗组降低程度更加显著;两组FMA评分均有显著提高,且治疗组提高程度优于对照组。结论抗痉挛治疗仪能有效降低脑卒中患者肱二头肌痉挛程度,并能缓解疼痛,提高其运动功能。     

Cross-reactive anti-galactocerebroside antibodies and Mycoplasma pneumoniae infections in Guillain-Barré syndrome

Anti-galactocerebroside (GalC) antibodies are reported to be present in GBS patients with preceding Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP) infection. We investigated the presence of anti-GalC reactivity in serum of a large group of GBS patients using ELISA and compared this with healthy controls and individuals with an uncomplicated MP infection. Anti-GalC antibody reactivity was present in 12% of the GBS patients. Furthermore, anti-GalC antibodies were associated with MP infections, a relatively mild form of the disease and demyelinating features. Anti-GalC antibodies cross-reacted with MP antigen. In conclusion, anti-GalC antibodies in GBS patients may be induced by molecular mimicry with MP.     

Autoimmune neuropathies: diagnosis, treatment, and recent topics

Here, we have reviewed the clinical patterns, diagnostic paradigms, etiopathogenesis, and therapeutic strategies of autoimmune neuropathies such as Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN), and IgM paraproteinemic neuropathy. Antiganglioside antibodies are frequently present in the serum samples obtained during the acutephase of GBS and Miller Fisher syndrome (MFS), a subtype of GBS. Recently, we found that some patients with GBS and MFS have serum antibodies against antigenic epitopes formed by 2 different gangliosides (ganglioside complex). The antibodies against GD1a/GD1b and/or GD1b/GT1b complexes are associated with severe disability and a requirement for mechanical ventilation. Anti-GM1/GalNAc-GD1a antibodies are found to be associated with pure motor GBS with frequent conduction blocks. In GBS, corticosteroids given alone do not significantly hasten the recovery or affect the long-term treatment outcome. Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy (IVIg) or plasma exchange (PE) is equally effective. Combined treatment with corticosteroids and IVIg may be a promising therapy for GBS. On the basis of the EFNS/PNS guidelines, we describe the treatment of chronic autoimmune neuropathies such as CIDP, MMN, and IgM paraproteinemic neuropathy. In treating CIDP, corticosteroids, IVIg, and plasma exchange are equally effective. In MMN, IVIg is the first-choice therapy; corticosteroids and PE are ineffective or even detrimental. IgM paraproteinemic neuropathies are known to be intractable, and these patients often have anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein antibodies and may respond to immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies. However, the potential therapeutic benefits should be balanced against their possible side effects and usual slow disease progression.