-
Neurology Aug 2017To assess the design characteristics and reporting quality of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for treatments of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the design characteristics and reporting quality of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for treatments of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) initiated before or during chemotherapy.
METHODS
In this systematic review of RCTs of preventive or symptomatic pharmacologic treatments for CIPN initiated before or during chemotherapy treatment, articles were identified by updating the PubMed search utilized in the CIPN treatment guidelines published in the in 2014.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight articles were identified. The majority included only patients receiving platinum therapies (61%) and used a placebo control (79%). Common exclusion criteria were preexisting neuropathy (84%), diabetes (55%), and receiving treatments that could potentially improve neuropathy symptoms (45%). Ninety-five percent of studies initiated the experimental treatment before CIPN symptoms occurred. Although 58% of articles identified a primary outcome measure (POM), only 32% specified a primary analysis. Approximately half (54%) of the POMs were patient-reported outcome measures of symptoms and functional impairment. Other POMs included composite measures of symptoms and clinician-rated signs (23%) and vibration tests (14%). Only 32% of articles indicated how data from participants who prematurely discontinued chemotherapy were analyzed, and 21% and 29% reported the number of participants who discontinued chemotherapy due to neuropathy or other/unspecified reasons, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
These data identify reporting practices that could be improved in order to enhance readers' ability to critically evaluate RCTs of CIPN treatments and use the findings to inform the design of future studies and clinical practice. Reporting recommendations are provided.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Humans; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28747442
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000004272 -
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2018We aim to summarize the available evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of imaging (index test) compared to surgery (reference test) for identifying lumbar disc herniation...
MAIN TEXT
We aim to summarize the available evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of imaging (index test) compared to surgery (reference test) for identifying lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in adult patients.For this systematic review we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (June 2017) for studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of imaging for LDH in adult patients with low back pain and surgery as the reference standard. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity using bivariate analysis, generated linked ROC plots in case of direct comparison of diagnostic imaging tests and assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE-approach.We found 14 studies, all but one done before 1995, including 940 patients. Nine studies investigated Computed Tomography (CT), eight myelography and six Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). The prior probability of LDH varied from 48.6 to 98.7%. The summary estimates for MRI and myelography were comparable with CT (sensitivity: 81.3% (95%CI 72.3-87.7%) and specificity: 77.1% (95%CI 61.9-87.5%)). The quality of evidence was moderate to very low.
CONCLUSIONS
The diagnostic accuracy of CT, myelography and MRI of today is unknown, as we found no studies evaluating today's more advanced imaging techniques. Concerning the older techniques we found moderate diagnostic accuracy for all CT, myelography and MRI, indicating a large proportion of false positives and negatives.
Topics: Humans; Intervertebral Disc Displacement; Low Back Pain; Lumbosacral Region; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Myelography; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sciatica; Tomography Scanners, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 30151119
DOI: 10.1186/s12998-018-0207-x -
Journal of Diabetes Research 2021Currently, diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most severe complications of diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite the seriousness of this problem, limited... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Currently, diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most severe complications of diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite the seriousness of this problem, limited evidence is available on the prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among patients with diabetes mellitus in Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, there were no updated studies that estimate the national prevalence of DPN. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis provided a national prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among patients with diabetes mellitus in Ethiopia.
METHODS
This study was submitted for registration with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in March 2020 and accepted with the registration number CRD42020173831. Different database searching engines were searched online to retrieve related articles, including PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, African Journals Online, World Health Organization (WHO) Afro Library, and Cochrane Review. The reviewers used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline in the reviewing process. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, all published and unpublished articles were analyzed. The reviewers used the random effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among diabetes mellitus patients. The reviewers conducted the statistical analysis using the R version 3.5.3 and RStudio version 1.2.5033 software for Windows. The reviewers evaluated the heterogeneity across the included studies by the inconsistency index ( ). The reviewers examined the publication bias by the funnel plot.
RESULTS
The search of the databases produced 245 papers. After checking the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 38 articles with 14029 total patients with diabetes mellitus were found suitable for the review. Except for three (retrospective cohort study), all studies were cross-sectional. The overall pooled prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy was 22% (95% CI 18% to 26%). The subgroup analysis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among patients with diabetes in the different regions was 23% (95% CI 17% to 29%) in Addis Ababa, 27% (95% CI 16% to 38%) in Oromia, 16% (95% CI 14% to 18%) in South nation and nationalities, and 15% (95% CI 6% to 24%) in Amhara.
CONCLUSIONS
More than one-fifth of patients with diabetes have diabetic peripheral neuropathy. According to this study, the prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in Ethiopia is considerably high. This evidence suggests that attention should be given to patients with diabetes in monitoring patients' blood glucose.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Neuropathies; Ethiopia; Humans; Prevalence
PubMed: 33628833
DOI: 10.1155/2021/5304124 -
The American Journal of Medicine Jan 2020Very little evidence is available on the prevalence of serious spinal pathologies and the diagnostic accuracy of red flags in patients presenting to the emergency...
BACKGROUND
Very little evidence is available on the prevalence of serious spinal pathologies and the diagnostic accuracy of red flags in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). This systematic review aims to investigate the prevalence of serious spinal pathologies and the diagnostic accuracy of red flags in patients presenting with low back pain to the ED.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS from inception to January 2019. Two reviewers independently reviewed the references and evaluated methodological quality.
RESULTS
We analyzed 22 studies with a total of 41,320 patients. The prevalence of any requiring immediate/urgent treatment was 2.5%-5.1% in prospective and 0.7%-7.4% in retrospective studies (0.0%-7.2% for vertebral fractures, 0.0%-2.1% for spinal cancer, 0.0%-1.9% for infectious disorders, 0.1%-1.9% for pathologies with spinal cord/cauda equina compression, 0.0%-0.9% for vascular pathologies). Examples of red flags which increased the likelihood for a serious condition were suspicion or history of cancer (spinal cancer); intravenous drug use, indwelling vascular catheter, and other infection site (epidural abscess).
CONCLUSION
We found a higher prevalence of serious spinal pathologies in the ED compared to the reported prevalence in primary care settings. As the diagnostic accuracy of most red flags was reported only by a single study, further validation in high-quality prospective studies is needed.
Topics: Catheters, Indwelling; Cauda Equina Syndrome; Emergency Service, Hospital; Epidural Abscess; Humans; Low Back Pain; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Spinal Cord Compression; Spinal Fractures; Spinal Neoplasms; Substance Abuse, Intravenous; Vascular Access Devices
PubMed: 31278933
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2019.06.005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a chronic pain condition that usually occurs in a limb following trauma or surgery. It is characterised by persisting pain that...
BACKGROUND
Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a chronic pain condition that usually occurs in a limb following trauma or surgery. It is characterised by persisting pain that is disproportionate in magnitude or duration to the typical course of pain after similar injury. There is currently no consensus regarding the optimal management of CRPS, although a broad range of interventions have been described and are commonly used. This is the first update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To summarise the evidence from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of any intervention used to reduce pain, disability, or both, in adults with CRPS.
METHODS
We identified Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews through a systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, PEDro, LILACS and Epistemonikos from inception to October 2022, with no language restrictions. We included systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials that included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with CRPS, using any diagnostic criteria. Two overview authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the reviews and certainty of the evidence using the AMSTAR 2 and GRADE tools respectively. We extracted data for the primary outcomes pain, disability and adverse events, and the secondary outcomes quality of life, emotional well-being, and participants' ratings of satisfaction or improvement with treatment. MAIN RESULTS: We included six Cochrane and 13 non-Cochrane systematic reviews in the previous version of this overview and five Cochrane and 12 non-Cochrane reviews in the current version. Using the AMSTAR 2 tool, we judged Cochrane reviews to have higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. The studies in the included reviews were typically small and mostly at high risk of bias or of low methodological quality. We found no high-certainty evidence for any comparison. There was low-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates may reduce pain intensity post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) -2.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.8 to -3.4, P = 0.001; I = 81%; 4 trials, n = 181) and moderate-certainty evidence that they are probably associated with increased adverse events of any nature (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.47; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.6, 95% CI 2.4 to 168.0; 4 trials, n = 181). There was moderate-certainty evidence that lidocaine local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade probably does not reduce pain intensity compared with placebo, and low-certainty evidence that it may not reduce pain intensity compared with ultrasound of the stellate ganglion. No effect size was reported for either comparison. There was low-certainty evidence that topical dimethyl sulfoxide may not reduce pain intensity compared with oral N-acetylcysteine, but no effect size was reported. There was low-certainty evidence that continuous bupivacaine brachial plexus block may reduce pain intensity compared with continuous bupivacaine stellate ganglion block, but no effect size was reported. For a wide range of other commonly used interventions, the certainty in the evidence was very low and provides insufficient evidence to either support or refute their use. Comparisons with low- and very low-certainty evidence should be treated with substantial caution. We did not identify any RCT evidence for routinely used pharmacological interventions for CRPS such as tricyclic antidepressants or opioids.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite a considerable increase in included evidence compared with the previous version of this overview, we identified no high-certainty evidence for the effectiveness of any therapy for CRPS. Until larger, high-quality trials are undertaken, formulating an evidence-based approach to managing CRPS will remain difficult. Current non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for CRPS are of low methodological quality and should not be relied upon to provide an accurate and comprehensive summary of the evidence.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Bupivacaine; Chronic Pain; Complex Regional Pain Syndromes; Quality of Life; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 37306570
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009416.pub3 -
Clinical Autonomic Research : Official... Aug 2019Diabetic neuropathy is a common and disabling disorder, and there are currently no proven effective disease-modifying treatments. Physical activity and dietary... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Diabetic neuropathy is a common and disabling disorder, and there are currently no proven effective disease-modifying treatments. Physical activity and dietary interventions in patients with diabetes and diabetic neuropathy have multiple beneficial effects and are generally low risk, which makes lifestyle interventions an attractive treatment option. We reviewed the literature on the effects of physical activity and dietary interventions on length-dependent peripheral neuropathy and cardiac autonomic neuropathy in diabetes.
METHODS
The electronic database PubMed was systematically searched for original human and mouse model studies examining the effect of either dietary or physical activity interventions in subjects with diabetes, prediabetes, or metabolic syndrome.
RESULTS
Twenty studies are included in this review. Fourteen studies were human studies and six were in mice. Studies were generally small with few controlled trials, and there are no widely agreed upon outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS
Recent research indicates that dietary interventions are effective in modifying diabetic neuropathy in animal models, and there are promising data that they may also ameliorate diabetic neuropathy in humans. It has been known for some time that lifestyle interventions can prevent the development of diabetic neuropathy in type 2 diabetes mellitus subjects. However, there is emerging evidence that lifestyle interventions are effective in individuals with established diabetic neuropathy. In addition to the observed clinical value of lifestyle interventions, there is emerging evidence of effects on biochemical pathways that improve muscle function and affect other organ systems, including the peripheral nerve. However, data from randomized controlled trials are needed.
Topics: Animals; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Neuropathies; Diet, Healthy; Exercise; Humans; Overweight; Risk Reduction Behavior
PubMed: 31076938
DOI: 10.1007/s10286-019-00607-x -
The Journal of Rheumatology Dec 2021The epidemiology and treatment of peripheral neuropathy in systemic sclerosis (SSc) is poorly understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the incidence,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The epidemiology and treatment of peripheral neuropathy in systemic sclerosis (SSc) is poorly understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the incidence, prevalence, risk factors, and treatments of peripheral neuropathy in SSc.
METHODS
A systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases for literature reporting peripheral neuropathy in SSc was performed. Studies evaluating incidence, prevalence, risk factors, and treatments were synthesized. A metaanalysis using a random effects model was used to evaluate the prevalence of peripheral neuropathy.
RESULTS
This systematic review identified 113 studies that reported 949 of 2143 subjects with at least 1 type of peripheral neuropathy. The mean age was 48.5 years. The mean time between SSc onset and detection of peripheral neuropathy was 8.85 years. The pooled prevalence of neuropathy was 27.37% (95% CI 22.35-32.70). Risk factors for peripheral neuropathy in SSc included advanced diffuse disease, anticentromere antibodies, calcinosis cutis, ischemia of the vasa nervorum, iron deficiency anemia, metoclopramide, pembrolizumab, silicosis, and uremia. There were 73 subjects with successful treatments (n = 36 restoring sensation, n = 37 restoring motor or sensorimotor function). Treatments included decompression surgery, prednisone, cyclophosphamide, carbamazepine, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, tricyclic antidepressants, and intravenous Ig.
CONCLUSION
All-cause peripheral neuropathy is not uncommon in SSc. Compression neuropathies can be treated with decompression surgery. Observational data reporting immunosuppressives and anticonvulsants to treat peripheral neuropathy in SSc are limited and conflicting. Randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of these interventions.
Topics: Humans; Incidence; Iron Deficiencies; Middle Aged; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Risk Factors; Scleroderma, Systemic
PubMed: 34210833
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.201299 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023Vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs, including VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D and PLGF) have important roles in the development and function of the peripheral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs, including VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D and PLGF) have important roles in the development and function of the peripheral nervous system. Studies have confirmed that VEGFs, especially VEGF-A (so called VEGF) may be associated with the diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) process. However, different studies have shown inconsistent levels of VEGFs in DPN patients. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between cycling levels of VEGFs and DPN.
METHODS
This study searched 7 databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Database, WanFang Database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM), to find the target researches. The random effects model was used to calculate the overall effect.
RESULTS
14 studies with 1983 participants were included, among which 13 studies were about VEGF and 1 was VEGF-B, so only the effects of VEGF were pooled. The result showed that there were obviously increased VEGF levels in DPN patients compared with diabetic patients without DPN (SMD:2.12[1.34, 2.90], <0.00001) and healthy people (SMD:3.50[2.24, 4.75], <0.00001). In addition, increased circulating VEGF levels were not associated with an increased risk of DPN (OR:1.02[0.99, 1.05], <0.00001).
CONCLUSION
Compared with healthy people and diabetic patients without DPN, VEGF content in the peripheral blood of DPN patients is increased, but current evidence does not support the correlation between VEGF levels and the risk of DPN. This suggests that VEGF may play a role in the pathogenesis and repairment of DPN.
Topics: Humans; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Neuropathies; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor B
PubMed: 37251664
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1169405 -
Journal of the National Cancer Institute Feb 2018Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women worldwide, and survival rates are increasing. Chemotherapy-associated peripheral neuropathy (PN) is clinically... (Review)
Review
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women worldwide, and survival rates are increasing. Chemotherapy-associated peripheral neuropathy (PN) is clinically important because of effects on quality of life (QOL) and potential effects on dose limitations. This adverse drug reaction is associated with certain classes of chemotherapy and commonly presents as peripheral sensory neuropathy whose natural course is largely unknown. The literature was reviewed to determine the frequency and characteristics of PN associated with adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) to explore the potential impact on long-term (one or more years after diagnosis) health outcomes and QOL. MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant English-language randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case-control and cohort studies published between January 1990 and July 1996. Included studies were limited to current adjuvant regimens (eg, anthracyclines, taxanes, cyclophosphamide, platinum compounds). Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts, full-text articles, and extracted data from fair- and good-quality studies. Discrepancies in quality assessment and data extraction were resolved by consensus. We identified 364 articles; 60 were eligible for full-text review. Only five reports of four studies provided data beyond one year post-treatment initiation. Studies used different measures to assess PN. Neuropathic symptoms persisted in 11.0% to more than 80% of participants at one to three years following treatment. There is a paucity of data describing persistent PN in ESBC patients. Consistent use of validated measures and well-conducted randomized clinical trials or observational studies are needed to evaluate the incidence, persistence, and QOL associated with the long-term effects of PN.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Neoplasm Staging; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases
PubMed: 28954296
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djx140 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, probably immune-mediated disorder characterised by slowly progressive, asymmetric, distal weakness of one or more limbs with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, probably immune-mediated disorder characterised by slowly progressive, asymmetric, distal weakness of one or more limbs with no objective loss of sensation. It may cause prolonged periods of disability. Treatment options for MMN are few. People with MMN do not usually respond to steroids or plasma exchange. Uncontrolled studies have suggested a beneficial effect of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005, with an amendment in 2007. We updated the review to incorporate new evidence.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous and subcutaneous immunoglobulin in people with MMN.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 20 April 2021: the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, and checked the reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered RCTs and quasi-RCTs examining the effects of any dose of IVIg and subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) in people with definite or probable MMN for inclusion in the review. Eligible studies had to have measured at least one of the following outcomes: disability, muscle strength, or electrophysiological conduction block. We used studies that reported the frequency of adverse effects to assess safety.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently reviewed the literature searches to identify potentially relevant trials, assessed risk of bias of included studies, and extracted data. We followed standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
Six cross-over RCTs including a total of 90 participants were suitable for inclusion in the review. Five RCTs compared IVIg to placebo, and one compared IVIg to SCIg. Four of the trials comparing IVIg versus placebo involved IVIg-naive participants (induction treatment). In the other two trials, participants were known IVIg responders receiving maintencance IVIg at baseline and were then randomised to maintenance treatment with IVIg or placebo in one trial, and IVIg or SCIg in the other. Risk of bias was variable in the included studies, with three studies at high risk of bias in at least one risk of bias domain. IVIg versus placebo (induction treatment): three RCTs including IVIg-naive participants reported a disability measure. Disability improved in seven out of 18 (39%) participants after IVIg treatment and in two out of 18 (11%) participants after placebo (risk ratio (RR) 3.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 10.12; 3 RCTs, 18 participants; low-certainty evidence). The proportion of participants with an improvement in disability at 12 months was not reported. Strength improved in 21 out of 27 (78%) IVIg-naive participants treated with IVIg and one out of 27 (4%) participants who received placebo (RR 11.00, 95% CI 2.86 to 42.25; 3 RCTs, 27 participants; low-certainty evidence). IVIg treatment may increase the proportion of people with resolution of at least one conduction block; however, the results were also consistent with no effect (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 51.70; 4 RCTs, 28 participants; low-certainty evidence). IVIg versus placebo (maintenance treatment): a trial that included participants on maintenance IVIg treatment reported an increase in disability in 17 out of 42 (40%) people switching to placebo and seven out of 42 (17%) remaining on IVIg (RR 2.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.24; 1 RCT, 42 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and a decrease in grip strength in 20 out of 42 (48%) participants after a switch to placebo treatment compared to four out of 42 (10%) remaining on IVIg (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.54; 1 RCT, 42 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, IVIg versus placebo (induction or maintenance): four trials comparing IVIg and placebo reported adverse events, of which data from two studies could be meta-analysed. Transient side effects were reported in 71% of IVIg-treated participants versus 4.8% of placebo-treated participants in these studies. The pooled RR for the development of side effects was 10.33 (95% CI 2.15 to 49.77; 2 RCTs, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was only one serious side effect (pulmonary embolism) during IVIg treatment. IVIg versus SCIg (maintenance treatment): the trial that compared continuation of IVIg maintenance versus SCIg maintenance did not measure disability. The evidence was very uncertain for muscle strength (standardised mean difference 0.08, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.00; 1 RCT, 9 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for the number of people with side effects attributable to treatment (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.40; 1 RCT, 9 participants; very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-certainty evidence from three small RCTs shows that IVIg may improve muscle strength in people with MMN, and low-certainty evidence indicates that it may improve disability; the estimate of the magnitude of improvement of disability has wide CIs and needs further studies to secure its significance. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, it is probable that most IVIg responders deteriorate in disability and muscle strength after IVIg withdrawal. SCIg might be an alternative treatment to IVIg, but the evidence is very uncertain. More research is needed to identify people in whom IVIg withdrawal is possible and to confirm efficacy of SCIg as an alternative maintenance treatment.
Topics: Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Plasma Exchange; Polyneuropathies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35015296
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004429.pub3