Suppr超能文献

抗 NMDA 受体脑炎治疗的差异:一项全球性调查的结果。

Differences in treatment of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis: results of a worldwide survey.

机构信息

Center for Neuroscience, George Washington University, Children's National Health System, 111 Michigan Ave NW, Washington, DC, 20010, USA.

Department of Pediatrics, Sections of Immunology, Allergy and Rheumatology and Co-appointment in Child Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX, USA.

出版信息

J Neurol. 2017 Apr;264(4):647-653. doi: 10.1007/s00415-017-8407-1. Epub 2017 Feb 2.

Abstract

The objective of the study was to identify differences in treatment strategies for anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis based on specialty of treating physicians, geographic location, and years in practice. We conducted an anonymous worldwide electronic survey through the Practice Current section of Neurology Clinical Practice to appraise differences in decisions about first- and second-line treatment and timing for initiation of second-line treatment for anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. 399 participants answered all questions of the survey and were included in the analysis. 261 (65%) were adult neurologists, 86 (22%) were neurologists treating children, and 52 (13%) were pediatric rheumatologists. 179 (45%) responders practiced in the US. The majority agreed on the use of steroids and/or IVIg for first-line therapy and rituximab alone as second line. Differences in initial treatment regimen based on specialty included increased use of plasma exchange by adult neurologists (27%) and rituximab by pediatric rheumatologists (29%) (χ (4) = 27.43, p < 0.001). Trainees opted for plasma exchange (35%) and junior faculty picked rituximab (15%) more as part of first line (χ (4) = 13.37, p = 0.010). There was greater usage of anti-metabolites for second-line therapy outside of the US (15%) (χ (4) = 11.67, p = 0.020). US physicians also utilized second-line treatment earlier than their mostly European counterparts (14 vs. 23% used later than 2 weeks; χ (1) = 4.96, p = 0.026). Although treatment patterns were similar, differences observed across specialties and geographic locations may guide the development of consensus-driven guidelines by multi-disciplinary task forces. These guidelines may promote treatment trials of immunomodulators in autoimmune encephalitides.

摘要

研究目的在于根据治疗医生的专业、地理位置和从业年限,确定抗 N- 甲基-D- 天冬氨酸受体脑炎的治疗策略差异。我们通过神经病学临床实践中的实践现状部分进行了一项匿名的全球电子调查,以评估抗 NMDA 受体脑炎一线和二线治疗决策以及二线治疗开始时间的差异。399 名参与者回答了调查的所有问题,并纳入分析。261 名(65%)为成人神经科医生,86 名(22%)为治疗儿童的神经科医生,52 名(13%)为儿科风湿病医生。179 名(45%)应答者在美国执业。大多数人同意将类固醇和/或 IVIg 作为一线治疗,单独使用利妥昔单抗作为二线治疗。基于专业的初始治疗方案存在差异,包括成人神经科医生更倾向于使用血浆置换(27%)和儿科风湿病医生更倾向于使用利妥昔单抗(29%)(χ(4)= 27.43,p < 0.001)。住院医师选择血浆置换(35%),初级教员选择利妥昔单抗(15%)作为一线治疗(χ(4)= 13.37,p = 0.010)。在美国以外,二线治疗中更常使用抗代谢物(15%)(χ(4)= 11.67,p = 0.020)。美国医生也比他们的大多数欧洲同行更早地使用二线治疗(14%比 23%使用时间晚于 2 周;χ(1)= 4.96,p = 0.026)。尽管治疗模式相似,但观察到的专业和地理位置之间的差异可能会指导多学科工作组制定基于共识的指南。这些指南可能会促进自身免疫性脑炎中免疫调节剂治疗试验。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验