Peripheral neuropathy as a hypereosinophilic syndrome and anti-GM1 antibodies

Hypereosinophilic vasculitis with Raynaud phenomenon presentation: a case report

BACKGROUND

Previous case series have reported idiopathic eosinophilic vasculitis as a potential manifestation of hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). This condition is characterized by digital necrotizing, systemic vasculitis that affects varying-sized blood vessels. This report presents our experience in treating a patient with eosinophilic vasculitis.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe the case of a 23-year-old man who presented with idiopathic HES, which manifested as digital ulcers and peripheral ischemia in both the upper and lower limbs, without the involvement of other organ systems. After ruling out primary and secondary causes of eosinophilia, a diagnosis of HES was established. Our patient has shown a positive response to corticosteroid therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case contributes to the existing evidence about diagnosing idiopathic eosinophilic vasculitis in patients with HES. We observed a favorable response to corticosteroid treatment in our patient.

Peripheral Neuropathy Associated withHypereosinophilic Syndrome

The idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) represents a leukoproliferative disorder, characterized by unexplained prolonged eosinophilia (>6 months) and evidence of specific organ damage. So far, the peripheral neuropathy associated with skin manifestations of HES has not been reported in the dermatologic literature although the incidence of peripheral neuropathy after HES ranges from 6~52%. Herein, we report the peripheral neuropathy associated with HES, documented by clinical, histopathological, and electrodiagnostic criteria.

[Spectrum of hypereosinophilia syndrome based on 2 clinical case reports]

BACKGROUND

Two severe cases of hypereosinophilic syndrome with cardiopulmonary symptoms, erythema nodosum, eosinophilic ileocolitis and paresthesia are reported. Definition, etiology, pathophysiological mechanisms, types, complications and therapeutic approaches of this relatively rare clinical disorder are discussed on the basis of these two cases. The distinction between eosinophilia and hypereosinophilic syndrome is clearly defined.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

The 2 cases of hypereosinophilic syndrome demonstrate the difficulty to decide whether they represent the idiopathic or the reactive type of hypereosinophilic syndrome. If the assumption is made in favor of the reactive type of hypereosinophilic syndrome the assumed prognosis could eventually be too promising. In case of an assumed idiopathic type of hypereosinophilic syndrome the search for causing factors like allergens could be left out. The decision concerning the type of hypereosinophilic syndrome of the 2 cases reported was made with high probability. In the case of idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome, eosinophilic leukemia was excluded by bone marrow biopsy.

CONCLUSION

In order to be able to make a diagnosis it is necessary to search carefully for causing and influencing factors of the hypereosinophilic syndrome such as allergens or medicaments and to eliminate them. The hypereosinophilic syndrome must be put under frequent control in order to avoid complications or to start with therapeutic approaches in time.