English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, study of 19 patients fulfilling eligibility criteria for multifocal motor neuropathy with persistent conduction block. They were enrolled and divided into two groups: those who had never been treated previously with intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) (Group 1: 10 patients) and those who presented recurrent symptoms after previously successful treatment with IVIg (Group 2: nine patients). They were randomized prospectively to receive either IVIg or placebo at a dose of 500 mg/kg/day for 5 consecutive days, once a month for 3 months. At month 4, patients found to be responders remained on the same treatment for the 3 following months, while non-responders were switched to the alternative study drug for the 3 following months. Clinical assessment was conducted with the MRC score in 28 muscles and a self-evaluation scale (five daily motor activities scored from 0 to 5). In Group 1, nine patients completed the study, of whom initially four received IVIg and five placebo; four patients responded to IVIg (two at months 4 and 7, and a further two at month 7 after switching treatment at month 4), two patients responded to placebo at months 4 and 7, and three patients did not respond to either treatment. In Group 2, nine patients completed the study. Five patients first received IVIg and all responded at months 4 and 7. Four patients first received placebo and none responded at month 4; all were then switched to IVIg and three responded at month 7. When the 18 patients were considered together, seven out of the nine patients who received IVIg first were responders at month 4, compared with two of the nine patients who received placebo first, a difference that was statistically significant (P = 0.03). On the other hand, there was no significant difference in MRC score but a significant difference in the self-evaluation score, at month 4, between IVIg patients and placebo patients. Electrophysiological studies did not show significant differences at month 4 in motor parameters between IVIg patients and placebo patients. IgM anti-GM1 titres did not change significantly in patients treated with IVIg compared with those who received placebo, between baseline, month 4 and month 7. However, of five patients who had significantly high anti-GM1 titres (&gt;3200) at baseline, four responded to IVIg. This trial confirms that IVIg is a promising therapeutic option for multifocal motor neuropathy.

Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy in multifocal motor neuropathy: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study