Neurology

First reported by Guillain, Barré, and Strohl during the Great War, the concept of "Guillain-Barré syndrome"(GBS) progressively emerged as a clinical entity in its own right. Despite many debates about its clinical and pathophysiologic characteristics, GBS is now recognized as a disease throughout the world. We describe here the main steps of the rich history of GBS, from 1916 to the present. © American Academy of Neurology

Epidemics and outbreaks of peripheral nervous system disorders: II. Toxic and nutritional causes

International audiencePeripheral neuropathies have various causes, both infectious and non-infectious. When we think of “epidemics”, we often refer to an infectious or even post-infectious origin. Nevertheless, the history of mankind is marked by episodes of epidemics of peripheral neuropathies of non-infectious nature, either of nutritional or toxic origin: we present here the main causes of such epidemics

J Neurol

The history of mankind is marked by numerous epidemics, some of which involved diseases of the peripheral nervous system, either infectious or otherwise. We describe here the three main infectious causes of epidemics that affect the peripheral nervous system: leprosy, poliomyelitis and diphtheria. We then discuss the main epidemics of immune-mediated origin

Neurology

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathy described in 1916 by Guillain, Barré, and Strohl. However, many similar cases had been reported earlier under various terms, with less detail and with various explanations about its pathophysiologic origin. Based on the analysis of old articles, we propose an overview of the history of acute inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathy before the official description of GBS. © American Academy of Neurology

Minimizing the Diagnostic Delay in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: The Role of Nonneurologist Practitioners

Introduction. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), usually fatal in a few years, is a neurodegenerative disorder where the diagnostic delay, although variable according to the studies, remains too long. The main objective of this study was to determine the average time to diagnose ALS and the role of each physician, general practitioner (GP), or specialist (neurologist or not) involved in the management of these patients. The secondary objective was to propose some simple schemes to quickly identify an ALS suspicion with the aim to reduce this delay. Patients and Methods. This retrospective study evaluated the diagnostic delay (and other intermediate delays) of 90 ALS patients registered in the ALS Center of Bordeaux (France) in 2013. The main clinical signs encountered (and their order of appearance) were studied. Results. The average diagnostic delay was 17 months, with a median diagnostic delay of 12 months. The average diagnostic delay was 2.7 months between the first symptoms and the first complaint to GP, followed by an additional 6.5 month delay before the patient’s first visit to a neurologist. This period could be shortened, especially if GP performed additional tests quickly (p=0.01), as the time spent consulting various specialists often extends this crucial step. Overall, diagnostic delay accounted for 40% of the total duration of the disease progression. Conclusion. In relation to total survival time, the diagnostic delay of ALS appears to be proportionately very long, sometimes longer than that observed in previous studies (because it also included the total delay to diagnostic or treatment initiation). The rapid execution of useful additional tests by the first medical doctor, often GP (with the help of a neurologist), considerably reduces the diagnostic delay. The central role of GP seems to be crucial in the management of patients with ALS. The main objective is, of course, to initiate appropriate treatment and care as soon as possible. Finally, based on our results, we also provide a short practical diagram to help nonneurologist practitioners to quickly discuss the diagnosis of ALS in case of some specific symptoms (“red flags”)

J Neurol Sci

Olfaction, one of our five main qualitative sensory abilities, is the action of smelling or the capacity to smell. Olfactory impairment can be a sign of a medical problem, from a benign nasal/sinus problem up to a potentially serious brain injury. However, although clinicians (neurologists or not) usually test the olfactory nerves in specific clinical situations (for example, when a neurodegenerative disorder is suspected), they may omit such tests in many other situations. With the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the resurgence of anosmia has reminded us of the importance of testing this sensorineural function. We retrace here the main historical steps and discoveries concerning olfaction and anosmia

Peripheral neuropathy and livedoid vasculopathy

International audienc

Neurology

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 among patients with MG and identify factors associated with COVID-19 severity in MG patients. METHODS: The CO-MY-COVID registry was a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study conducted in neuromuscular referral centers and general hospitals of the FILNEMUS network (between March 1, 2020, and June 8, 2020), including MG patients with a confirmed or highly-suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. COVID-19 was diagnosed based on a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test from a nasopharyngeal swab and/or SARS-CoV-2 serology, thoracic computed tomography (CT-scan), or typical symptoms. The main outcome was COVID-19 severity based on location of treatment/management (home, hospitalized in a medical unit, or in an intensive care unit). We collected information on demographic variables, general history, and risk factors for severe COVID-19. Multivariate ordinal regression models were used to identify factors associated with severe COVID-19 outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3,558 MG patients registered in the French database for rare disorders, 34 (0.96%) had COVID-19. The mean age at COVID-19 onset was 55.0 ±19.9 years (mean MG duration: 8.5 ± 8.5 years). By the end of the study period, 28 patients recovered from COVID-19, 1 remained affected, and 5 died. Only high Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) class (≥IV) before COVID-19 was associated with severe COVID-19 (p=0.004); factors that were not associated included gender, MG duration, and medium MGFA classes (≤IIIb). The type of MG treatment had no independent effect on COVID-19 severity. CONCLUSIONS: This registry-based cohort study shows that COVID-19 had a limited effect on most patients, and immunosuppressive medications and corticosteroids used for MG management are not risk factors for poorer outcomes. However, the risk of severe COVID-19 is elevated in patients with high MGFA classes [odds ratio: 102.6 (4.4; 2,371.9)]. These results are important for establishing evidence-based guidelines for the management of MG patients during the COVID-19 pandemic