Immunoglobulin unresponsive Guillain-Barré syndrome: rinse or repeat? A systematic review.

IF 2.1 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
BMJ Neurology Open Pub Date : 2025-02-12 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjno-2024-000907
Thomas Roe, Alex Gordon, Nicholas Gourd, Charlotte Thomas, James Ward, Chinar Osman, Ahilanandan Dushianthan
{"title":"Immunoglobulin unresponsive Guillain-Barré syndrome: rinse or repeat? A systematic review.","authors":"Thomas Roe, Alex Gordon, Nicholas Gourd, Charlotte Thomas, James Ward, Chinar Osman, Ahilanandan Dushianthan","doi":"10.1136/bmjno-2024-000907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Severe Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) patients may not show improvement after a single course of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy. Current treatment options include either a second course of IVIg or therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). This systematic review aims to evaluate the current literature on the use of a second course of IVIg or TPE in patients who fail to show clinical improvement after the first IVIg course.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase and Medline databases up until 26 October 2023. Studies that evaluated adult patients with confirmed GBS who have failed one full course of IVIg and subsequently received either repeat IVIg or TPE were included. Risk of bias was performed using study-specific checklists. A narrative synthesis of results is presented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 37 articles were identified (1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), 3 observational and 33 case reports/series), consisting of 422 patients in total. 12 studies evaluated repeat IVIg and 24 studies evaluated TPE after IVIg. There was no superiority of a repeat course of IVIg or TPE in all clinical outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence suggests with a low degree of certainty that there is no beneficial effect of further IVIg in unresponsive GBS. The quality of evidence regarding TPE after IVIg is insufficient to suggest any efficacy due to a lack of RCTs. We recommend standardised case reporting with consideration for a multinational case registry and RCTs to determine the efficacy of TPE after initial IVIg unresponsiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":52754,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Neurology Open","volume":"7 1","pages":"e000907"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11822392/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Neurology Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjno-2024-000907","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Severe Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) patients may not show improvement after a single course of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) therapy. Current treatment options include either a second course of IVIg or therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). This systematic review aims to evaluate the current literature on the use of a second course of IVIg or TPE in patients who fail to show clinical improvement after the first IVIg course.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Medline databases up until 26 October 2023. Studies that evaluated adult patients with confirmed GBS who have failed one full course of IVIg and subsequently received either repeat IVIg or TPE were included. Risk of bias was performed using study-specific checklists. A narrative synthesis of results is presented.

Results: A total of 37 articles were identified (1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), 3 observational and 33 case reports/series), consisting of 422 patients in total. 12 studies evaluated repeat IVIg and 24 studies evaluated TPE after IVIg. There was no superiority of a repeat course of IVIg or TPE in all clinical outcome measures.

Conclusions: The evidence suggests with a low degree of certainty that there is no beneficial effect of further IVIg in unresponsive GBS. The quality of evidence regarding TPE after IVIg is insufficient to suggest any efficacy due to a lack of RCTs. We recommend standardised case reporting with consideration for a multinational case registry and RCTs to determine the efficacy of TPE after initial IVIg unresponsiveness.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Neurology Open
BMJ Neurology Open Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
46
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信