Motor chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) in 17 patients: Clinical characteristics, electrophysiological study, and response to treatment. Issue 2 (26th May 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pegat, Antoine; Boisseau, William; Maisonobe, Thierry; Debs, Rabab; Lenglet, Timothée; Psimaras, Dimitri; Azoulay‐Cayla, Arièle; Fournier, Emmanuel; Viala, Karine
• Is Part Of: Journal of the peripheral nervous system. Volume 25:Issue 2(2020)
• Page Start: 162
• Page End: 170
• Publication Date: 2020-05-26
• Subjects: cancer -- corticosteroid -- motor CIDP -- motor predominant CIDP -- pure motor CIDP; Nervous system -- Periodicals; Nerves, Peripheral -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases -- Periodicals; Peripheral Nervous System -- Periodicals; 612.81
• DOI: 10.1111/jns.12380
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1085-9489

Abstract

Abstract: Motor chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a rare and poorly described subtype of CIDP. We aimed to study their clinical and electrophysiological characteristics and response to treatment. From a prospective database of CIDP patients, we included patients with definite or probable CIDP with motor signs and without sensory signs/symptoms at diagnosis. Patients were considered to have pure motor CIDP (PM‐CIDP) if sensory conductions were normal or to have motor predominant CIDP (MPred‐CIDP) if ≥2 sensory nerve action potential amplitudes were abnormal. Among the 700 patients with CIDP, 17 (2%) were included (PM‐CIDP n = 7, MPred‐CIDP n = 10); 71% were male, median age at onset was 48 years (range: 13‐76 years), 47% had an associated inflammatory or infectious disease or neoplasia. At the more severe disease stage, 94% of patients had upper and lower limb weakness, with distal and proximal weakness in 4 limbs for 56% of them. Three‐quarters (75%) responded to intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) and four of five patients to corticosteroids including three of three patients with MPred‐CIDP. The most frequent conduction abnormalities were conduction blocks (CB, 82%) and F‐wave abnormalities (88%). During follow up, 4 of 10 MPred‐CIDP patients developed mild sensory symptoms; none with PM‐CIDP did so. Patients with PM‐CIDP had poorer outcome (median ONLS: 4; range: 22‐5) compared to MPred‐CIDP (2, range: 0‐4; P = .03) at last follow up. This study found a progressive clinical course in the majority of patients with motor CIDP as well as frequent associated diseases, CB, and F‐wave abnormalities. Corticosteroids might be considered as a therapeutic option in resistant IVIg patients with MPred‐CIDP.