Rhabdomyolysis after COVID-19 Comirnaty Vaccination: A Case Report

Rhabdomyolysis is an acute disruption in skeletal muscle integrity, leading to the rapid release of 4 muscle contents into the bloodstream, such as creatine kinase (CK). It can have various causes, including infections. Throughout the pandemic, multiple cases of rhabdomyolysis following COVID-19 infections have been reported. However, rhabdomyolysis subsequent to COVID-19 vaccinations appears to be relatively rare. Here, we report such a case after a second COVID-19 Comirnaty (BioNTech/Pfizer) vaccination. Our patient developed rhabdomyolysis 1 day after the second Comirnaty vaccination with high creatine kinase (CK) levels, generalized weakness, and kidney failure. CK levels and muscle weakness resolved after treatment with intravenous fluids, but unfortunately, he remained hemodialysis dependent after discharge. To our knowledge, this is one of the first case reports describing a patient with rhabdomyolysis after a Comirnaty vaccination. However, as millions of people have received the Comirnaty vaccine, it is unclear whether the rhabdomyolysis in our patient is a rare side effect or an unrelated, coincidental event. Large observational studies are needed to elucidate the causality between the Comirnaty vaccination and rhabdomyolysis. Awareness is warranted in patients with myalgia and muscle weakness shortly after COVID-19 vaccination, in order to initiate treatment early and prevent life-threatening complications

Wartenberg’s migrant sensory neuritis: a prospective follow-up study

Migrant sensory neuropathy (Wartenberg’s migrant sensory neuritis) is characterized by sudden numbness in the distribution of one or multiple cutaneous nerves. To study disease course and outcome, we prospectively followed 12 patients who presented to our tertiary referral neuromuscular outpatient clinic between January 2003 and January 2004. Medical history, neurological, laboratory and electrophysiological examinations were obtained from all patients. All patients were reviewed a second time in 2007, and five had a follow-up electrophysiological examination. At the first visit, 50% described an episode of stretching preceding the sensory complaints. All but three described pain in the affected area before or concomitant with sensory loss. At clinical examination a median of six skin areas were affected, and in 75% this could be confirmed by nerve conduction studies in at least one nerve. Forty-two percent had involvement of the trigeminal nerve. After a mean disease duration of 7.5 years, three patients reported a complete disappearance of sensory complaints and five that the pain had disappeared, but numbness remained. Three patients still had both painful and numb sensory deficits. One patient developed a distal symmetric sensory polyneuropathy. In conclusion, Wartenberg’s sensory neuritis is a distinct, exclusively sensory, neuropathy, marked by pain preceding numbness in affected nerves. An episode of stretching preceding pain is not necessary for the diagnosis. Wartenberg’s sensory neuritis often retains its spotty, exclusively sensory characteristics after long term follow-up

Second intravenous immunoglobulin dose in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with poor prognosis (SID-GBS):a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background Treatment with one standard dose (2 g/kg) of intravenous immunoglobulin is insufficient in a proportion of patients with severe Guillain-Barre syndrome. Worldwide, around 25% of patients severely affected with the syndrome are given a second intravenous immunoglobulin dose (SID), although it has not been proven effective. We aimed to investigate whether a SID is effective in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with a predicted poor outcome. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (SID-GBS), we included patients (>= 12 years) with Guillain-Barre syndrome admitted to one of 59 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were included on the first day of standard intravenous immunoglobulin treatment (2 g/kg over 5 days). Only patients with a poor prognosis (score of >= 6) according to the modified Erasmus Guillain-Barre syndrome Outcome Score were randomly assigned, via block randomisation stratified by centre, to SID (2 g/kg over 5 days) or to placebo, 7-9 days after inclusion. Patients, outcome adjudicators, monitors, and the steering committee were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the Guillain-Barre syndrome disability score 4 weeks after inclusion. All patients in whom allocated trial medication was started were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Findings Between Feb 16, 2010, and June 5, 2018, 327 of 339 patients assessed for eligibility were included. 112 had a poor prognosis. Of those, 93 patients with a poor prognosis were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 49 (53%) received SID and 44 (47%) received placebo. The adjusted common odds ratio for improvement on the Guillain-Barre syndrome disability score at 4 weeks was 1.4 (95% CI 0.6-3.3; p=0.45). Patients given SID had more serious adverse events (35% vs 16% in the first 30 days), including thromboembolic events, than those in the placebo group. Four patients died in the intervention group (13-24 weeks after randomisation). Interpretation Our study does not provide evidence that patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome with a poor prognosis benefit from a second intravenous immunoglobulin course; moreover, it entails a risk of serious adverse events. Therefore, a second intravenous immunoglobulin course should not be considered for treatment of Guillain-Barre syndrome because of a poor prognosis. The results indicate the need for treatment trials with other immune modulators in patients severely affected by Guillain-Barre syndrome. Funding Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds and Sanquin Plasma Products. Copyright (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Second intravenous immunoglobulin dose in patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome with poor prognosis (SID-GBS): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Treatment with one standard dose (2 g/kg) of intravenous immunoglobulin is insufficient in a proportion of patients with severe Guillain-Barré syndrome. Worldwide, around 25% of patients severely affected with the syndrome are given a second intravenous immunoglobulin dose (SID), although it has not been proven effective. We aimed to investigate whether a SID is effective in patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome with a predicted poor outcome. Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (SID-GBS), we included patients (≥12 years) with Guillain-Barré syndrome admitted to one of 59 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were included on the first day of standard intravenous immunoglobulin treatment (2 g/kg over 5 days). Only patients with a poor prognosis (score of ≥6) according to the modified Erasmus Guillain-Barré syndrome Outcome Score were randomly assigned, via block randomisation stratified by centre, to SID (2 g/kg over 5 days) or to placebo, 7–9 days after inclusion. Patients, outcome adjudicators, monitors, and the steering committee were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the Guillain-Barré syndrome disability score 4 weeks after inclusion. All patients in whom allocated trial medication was started were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. This study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR 2224/NL2107. Findings: Between Feb 16, 2010, and June 5, 2018, 327 of 339 patients assessed for eligibility were included. 112 had a poor prognosis. Of those, 93 patients with a poor prognosis were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 49 (53%) received SID and 44 (47%) received placebo. The adjusted common odds ratio for improvement on the Guillain-Barré syndrome disability score at 4 weeks was 1·4 (95% CI 0·6–3·3; p=0·45). Patients given SID had more serious adverse events (35% vs 16% in the first 30 days), including thromboembolic events, than those in the placebo group. Four patients died in the intervention group (13–24 weeks after randomisation). Interpretation: Our study does not provide evidence that patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome with a poor prognosis benefit from a second intravenous immunoglobulin course; moreover, it entails a risk of serious adverse events. Therefore, a second intravenous immunoglobulin course should not be considered for treatment of Guillain-Barre syndrome because of a poor prognosis. The results indicate the need for treatment trials with other immune modulators in patients severely affected by Guillain-Barré syndrome. Funding: Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds and Sanquin Plasma Products