European neurology · 2010
Early aggressive treatment strategy against myasthenia gravis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nagane Yuriko, Suzuki Shigeaki, Suzuki Norihiro, Utsugisawa Kimiaki
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: In treating myasthenia gravis (MG), our aims were to achieve early minimal manifestations (MM) by performing early aggressive therapy (EAT) using plasmapheresis and high-dose intravenous methylprednisolone, and then to maintain the status with low-dose oral corticosteroids (EAT strategy). We examined the merits of the EAT strategy.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed long-term effects of the EAT strategy (duration of therapy: 4.1 years) for 49 de novo MG patients and compared the effects to those of high-dose oral prednisolone therapy for 22 patients.
RESULTS: The EAT group achieved marked early improvement with much lower doses of oral prednisolone compared to the high-dose prednisolone group. The patients who achieved MM with prednisolone ≤5 mg/day were more frequent in the EAT group at both 1 year (57.1 vs. 4.5%) and final observation (77.6 vs. 27.3%). Both new-onset diabetes and patients who had complained of moon face were less frequent in the EAT group. However, in the EAT group, due to a temporary inability to maintain MM, additional short-term hospitalizations to return to MM by EAT were required.
CONCLUSIONS: The EAT strategy has advantages of early improvement with less frequent steroid-related complications. The labor and cost required are evident disadvantages.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed long-term effects of the EAT strategy (duration of therapy: 4.1 years) for 49 de novo MG patients and compared the effects to those of high-dose oral prednisolone therapy for 22 patients.
RESULTS: The EAT group achieved marked early improvement with much lower doses of oral prednisolone compared to the high-dose prednisolone group. The patients who achieved MM with prednisolone ≤5 mg/day were more frequent in the EAT group at both 1 year (57.1 vs. 4.5%) and final observation (77.6 vs. 27.3%). Both new-onset diabetes and patients who had complained of moon face were less frequent in the EAT group. However, in the EAT group, due to a temporary inability to maintain MM, additional short-term hospitalizations to return to MM by EAT were required.
CONCLUSIONS: The EAT strategy has advantages of early improvement with less frequent steroid-related complications. The labor and cost required are evident disadvantages.