Human immunoglobulin versus plasmapheresis in guillain-barre syndrome and myasthenia gravis: A meta-analysis

Paola Ortiz-Salas, Alberto Velez-Van-Meerbeke, Camilo Alberto Galvis-Gomez, Jesús H. Rodriguez

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

7 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

© 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety over a short time period of human intravenous immunoglobulin versus plasma exchange (PE) in the management of some autoimmune neurologic diseases. In addition, length of hospital stay and duration of ventilator support were compared. Methods: Randomized controlled trials and analytical observational studies of more than 10 cases were reviewed. Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, HINARI, and Ovid, were searched as data source. Reference lists were examined for further relevant articles. A random-effect model was used to derive a pooled risk ratio. Results: A total of 552 articles were found and 24 met the criteria for a studied population of 4657 cases: 14 articles were about Guillain-Barré syndrome and 10 of myasthenia gravis. No evidence was found to suggest that PE or intravenous immunoglobulin differed in terms of efficacy or safety to treat any of the 2 diseases. Hospital stay length and ventilatory support time are different in each illness; however, we found no statistical difference in either of the 2 treatments. Conclusions: There is no evidence for superiority in the efficacy or safety of immunoglobulin or plasmapheresis in the management of Guillain-Barré syndrome and myasthenia gravis. However, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of these results given the limitations in the quality of the evidence and the heterogeneity of the studies.
Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)1-11
Número de páginas11
PublicaciónJournal of Clinical Neuromuscular Disease
EstadoPublished - ago 23 2016

Huella dactilar

Guillain-Barre Syndrome
Plasmapheresis
Myasthenia Gravis
Meta-Analysis
Immunoglobulins
Length of Stay
Plasma Exchange
Intravenous Immunoglobulins
Safety
Autoimmune Diseases of the Nervous System
Neuromuscular Diseases
Information Storage and Retrieval
Mechanical Ventilators
MEDLINE
Observational Studies
Randomized Controlled Trials
Odds Ratio
Health
Population
Therapeutics

Citar esto

@article{abea13177bf943e0981f51023f9492ab,
title = "Human immunoglobulin versus plasmapheresis in guillain-barre syndrome and myasthenia gravis: A meta-analysis",
abstract = "{\circledC} 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety over a short time period of human intravenous immunoglobulin versus plasma exchange (PE) in the management of some autoimmune neurologic diseases. In addition, length of hospital stay and duration of ventilator support were compared. Methods: Randomized controlled trials and analytical observational studies of more than 10 cases were reviewed. Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, HINARI, and Ovid, were searched as data source. Reference lists were examined for further relevant articles. A random-effect model was used to derive a pooled risk ratio. Results: A total of 552 articles were found and 24 met the criteria for a studied population of 4657 cases: 14 articles were about Guillain-Barr{\'e} syndrome and 10 of myasthenia gravis. No evidence was found to suggest that PE or intravenous immunoglobulin differed in terms of efficacy or safety to treat any of the 2 diseases. Hospital stay length and ventilatory support time are different in each illness; however, we found no statistical difference in either of the 2 treatments. Conclusions: There is no evidence for superiority in the efficacy or safety of immunoglobulin or plasmapheresis in the management of Guillain-Barr{\'e} syndrome and myasthenia gravis. However, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of these results given the limitations in the quality of the evidence and the heterogeneity of the studies.",
author = "Paola Ortiz-Salas and Alberto Velez-Van-Meerbeke and Galvis-Gomez, {Camilo Alberto} and Rodriguez, {Jes{\'u}s H.}",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "23",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--11",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Neuromuscular Disease",
issn = "1522-0443",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",

}

Human immunoglobulin versus plasmapheresis in guillain-barre syndrome and myasthenia gravis: A meta-analysis. / Ortiz-Salas, Paola; Velez-Van-Meerbeke, Alberto; Galvis-Gomez, Camilo Alberto; Rodriguez, Jesús H.

En: Journal of Clinical Neuromuscular Disease, 23.08.2016, p. 1-11.

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

TY - JOUR

T1 - Human immunoglobulin versus plasmapheresis in guillain-barre syndrome and myasthenia gravis: A meta-analysis

AU - Ortiz-Salas, Paola

AU - Velez-Van-Meerbeke, Alberto

AU - Galvis-Gomez, Camilo Alberto

AU - Rodriguez, Jesús H.

PY - 2016/8/23

Y1 - 2016/8/23

N2 - © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety over a short time period of human intravenous immunoglobulin versus plasma exchange (PE) in the management of some autoimmune neurologic diseases. In addition, length of hospital stay and duration of ventilator support were compared. Methods: Randomized controlled trials and analytical observational studies of more than 10 cases were reviewed. Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, HINARI, and Ovid, were searched as data source. Reference lists were examined for further relevant articles. A random-effect model was used to derive a pooled risk ratio. Results: A total of 552 articles were found and 24 met the criteria for a studied population of 4657 cases: 14 articles were about Guillain-Barré syndrome and 10 of myasthenia gravis. No evidence was found to suggest that PE or intravenous immunoglobulin differed in terms of efficacy or safety to treat any of the 2 diseases. Hospital stay length and ventilatory support time are different in each illness; however, we found no statistical difference in either of the 2 treatments. Conclusions: There is no evidence for superiority in the efficacy or safety of immunoglobulin or plasmapheresis in the management of Guillain-Barré syndrome and myasthenia gravis. However, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of these results given the limitations in the quality of the evidence and the heterogeneity of the studies.

AB - © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety over a short time period of human intravenous immunoglobulin versus plasma exchange (PE) in the management of some autoimmune neurologic diseases. In addition, length of hospital stay and duration of ventilator support were compared. Methods: Randomized controlled trials and analytical observational studies of more than 10 cases were reviewed. Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, HINARI, and Ovid, were searched as data source. Reference lists were examined for further relevant articles. A random-effect model was used to derive a pooled risk ratio. Results: A total of 552 articles were found and 24 met the criteria for a studied population of 4657 cases: 14 articles were about Guillain-Barré syndrome and 10 of myasthenia gravis. No evidence was found to suggest that PE or intravenous immunoglobulin differed in terms of efficacy or safety to treat any of the 2 diseases. Hospital stay length and ventilatory support time are different in each illness; however, we found no statistical difference in either of the 2 treatments. Conclusions: There is no evidence for superiority in the efficacy or safety of immunoglobulin or plasmapheresis in the management of Guillain-Barré syndrome and myasthenia gravis. However, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of these results given the limitations in the quality of the evidence and the heterogeneity of the studies.

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 11

JO - Journal of Clinical Neuromuscular Disease

JF - Journal of Clinical Neuromuscular Disease

SN - 1522-0443

ER -