Les polyradiculonévrites inflammatoires démyélinisantes chroniques

Prevalence and associated factors with peripheral neuropathies in the general population in the rural area of Adjohoun in Benin

BACKGROUND

Peripheral neuropathies (PN) are a group of neurological conditions related to damage to the peripheral nervous system. Due to their wide diversity, few studies in sub-Saharan Africa have explored their epidemiology in general population. Our objective was to study the prevalence and associated factors with PN in general population in Adjohoun in Benin.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study has been conducted from February to March 2019 and included people aged ≥ 18 years old living in Adjohoun, Benin. Following a screening phase for PN (using World Health Organization questionnaire for major neurological diseases), a neurologist made a diagnosis after in-depth clinical examinations completed in some cases by electroneuromyography. The EFNS (European Federation of Neurological Societies) 2010 criteria was used for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy diagnosis. Data such as age, occupation, consanguinity, alcohol consumption, diabetes, hypertension were collected. Association between independent variables and PN were investigated using multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 1 655 participants were included, mean age 41.4 ± 16.7 years; 64.8 % are female. The overall prevalence of PN was 6.9 % (95 %CI: 5.7 %-8.2 %). The main types of PN were: polyneuropathies 4.8 % (95 %CI: 3.8 %-5.9 %); polyradiculoneuropathies 1.6 % (95 %CI: 1.0 %-2.2 %). Factors independently associated with PN were age ≥ 40 years (adjusted Odds Ratio aOR = 19.6; 95 %CI: 8.2-46.3), diabetes (aOR = 1.8; 95 %CI: 1.08-2.99) and hypertension (aOR = 1.6; 95 %CI: 1.02-2.5).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of PN was high in the rural commune of Adjohoun in Benin. Actions on its modifiable associated factors such as diabetes and hypertension could help reduce the proportion of PN and their potential harmful consequences.

Immunoglobulin shortage: Practice modifications and clinical outcomes in a reference centre

BACKGROUND

Growing numbers of indications for intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) in recent years has resulted in an increase in the consumption of these products. A lack of raw material has led to IVIg shortage. The objective of this work was to evaluate the impact of this situation on patient care in one French referral centre considering practice modifications and clinical impact.

METHODS

All patients treated with IVIg for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, multifocal motor neuropathy and myasthenia gravis from October 2017 to October 2018 were included.

RESULTS

Out of 142 patients, 111 (78%) had a modification of their IVIg treatment. We noted that 75 (68%) patients had a delay in IVIg treatment, 41 (37%) patients had a decrease in IVIg doses and 31 (28%) experienced IVIg treatment interruption. Thirty percent of patients for whom IVIg treatment was discontinued were switched to other treatments mainly plasma exchange (16%) or corticosteroids (13%). Switches to plasma exchange or corticosteroids were carried out in order to save immunoglobulins for patients who had no other alternatives. Fifty-eight (52%) patients presented a deterioration of their clinical score after IVIg treatment changes including 31 (28%) patients who had a moderate or a clinically significant deterioration. Concerning practice modifications, we noted a substantial though not significant decrease in median IVIg dose for myasthenia gravis and a significant increase in the delay between IVIg courses for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy and multifocal motor neuropathy (P=0.011 and P=0.018 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed a rather important number of changes in IVIg treatment related to IVIg shortage during the period considered. These changes had a negative impact on the clinical status of some patients.

Neuropathies périphériques associées aux syndromes lymphoprolifératifs : spectre clinique et démarche diagnostique

Lymphoproliferative syndromes (multiple myeloma, Waldenström's disease, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, lymphomas) may be associated with peripheral neuropathies. The mechanism can be dysimmune, associated or not with monoclonal gammopathies; paraneoplastic; infiltrative; or more commonly, iatrogenic or due to vitamin deficiency. The diagnosis can be complex, especially when the neuropathy is the presenting manifestation, requiring a close cooperation between internists and neurologists. The positive diagnosis of the neuropathy is based on a systematic electro-clinical investigation, which specifies the topography and the mechanism of the nerve damage, sometimes reinforced by imaging examinations, in particular, nerve and/or plexus MRI. The imputability of the neuropathy to a lymphoproliferative syndrome is based on a set of arguments including the clinical context (B signs, tumour syndrome), first-line laboratory tests (hemogram, protein electrophoresis, viral serologies, complement), auto-antibodies discussed according to the neuropathy (anti-MAG, anti-gangliosides) and sometimes more invasive examinations (bone marrow or neuro-muscular biopsies).

[Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: Diagnosis and therapeutic update]

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathies are acquired demyelinating neuropathies belonging to the group of autoimmune neuropathies. Since specific biological markers are present in less than 10% of cases, the diagnosis is based on the clinical and electrophysiological analysis of each patient. Furthermore, a decision-making algorithm ranking all other available paraclinical tools will guide the physician to the diagnosis of atypical forms. In nearly 80% of cases, these dysimmune neuropathies are responsive to first-line treatments, namely intravenous immunoglobulins, corticosteroids and plasma exchanges. A second line treatment may be proposed in case of no response, intolerance or inaccessibility to the three reference treatments. While some immunosuppressants or monoclonal antibodies can sometimes be very effective, there is currently no predictive marker or recommendation available to determine which treatment will be most appropriate for which patient.