Role of gancyclovir and HAART administration in the treatment of a rare complication of HIV disease: cytomegalovirus-associated Guillain-Barré syndrome

The Peculiarity of Infection and Immunity Correlated with Guillain-Barré Syndrome in the HIV-Infected Population

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) can occur at all stages of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. HIV, cytomegalovirus (CMV), and varicella zoster virus (VZV) are the main infectious agents in HIV-positive GBS cases. These cases include acute and chronic HIV infection, immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) shortly after anti-retroviral therapy (ART), those with ART interruption, or those with cerebrospinal fluids (CSF) HIV escape. The mechanisms are involved in both humoral and cellular immunities. Demyelinating and axonal neuropathies are the main pathological mechanisms in GBS. Presentation and prognosis are identical to those in patients without HIV infection. Typical or atypical clinical manifestations, CSF analysis, electrophysiological and pathological examination, and antiganglioside antibody detection can help diagnose GBS and classify its various subtypes. Intravenous immunoglobulin and plasma exchange have been used to treat GBS in HIV-positive patients with a necessary ART, while ganciclovir or foscarnet sodium should be used to treat ongoing CMV- or VZV-associated GBS. Steroids may be beneficial for patients with IRIS-related GBS. We reviewed HIV-positive cases with GBS published since 2000 and summarized their features to highlight the necessity of HIV testing among patients with GBS. Moreover, the establishment of a multidisciplinary team will guarantee diagnostic and therapeutic advantages.

HIV peripheral neuropathy

Peripheral neuropathies are the most common neurological manifestations occurring in HIV-infected individuals. Distal symmetrical sensory neuropathy is the most common form encountered today and is one of the few that are specific to HIV infection or its treatment. The wide variety of other neuropathies is akin to the neuropathies seen in the general population and should be managed accordingly. In the pre-ART era, neuropathies were categorized according to the CD4 count and HIV viral load. In the early stages of HIV infection when CD4 count is high, the inflammatory demyelinating neuropathies predominate and in the late stages with the decline of CD4 count opportunistic infection-related neuropathies prevail. That scenario has changed with the present almost universal use of ART (antiretroviral therapy). Hence, HIV-associated peripheral neuropathies are better classified according to their clinical presentations: distal symmetrical polyneuropathy, acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (AIDP) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP), mononeuropathies, mononeuropathies multiplex and cranial neuropathies, autonomic neuropathy, lumbosacral polyradiculomyelopathy, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)-like motor neuropathy. Treated with ART, HIV-infected individuals are living longer and are at a higher risk of metabolic and age-related complications; moreover they are also prone to the potentially neurotoxic effects of ART. There are no epidemiological data regarding the incidence and prevalence of the peripheral neuropathies. In the pre-ART era, most data were from case reports, series of patients, and pooled autopsy data. At that time the histopathological evidence of neuropathies in autopsy series was almost 100%. In large prospective cohorts presently being evaluated, it has been found that 57% of HIV-infected individuals have distal symmetrical sensory neuropathy and 38% have neuropathic pain. It is now clear that distal symmetrical sensory neuropathy is caused predominantly by the ART's neurotoxic effect but may also be caused by the HIV itself. With a sizeable morbidity, the neuropathic pain caused by distal symmetrical sensory neuropathy is very difficult to manage; it is often necessary to change the ART regimen before deciding upon the putative role of HIV infection itself. If the change does not improve the pain, there are few options available; the most common drugs used for neuropathic pain are usually not effective. One is left with cannabis, which cannot be recommended as routine therapy, recombinant human nerve growth factor, which is unavailable, and topical capsaicin with its side-effects. Much has been done to and learned from HIV infection in humans; HIV-infected individuals, treated with ART, are now dying mostly from cardiovascular disease and non-AIDS-related cancers. It hence behooves us to find new approaches to mitigate the residual neurological morbidity that still impacts the quality of life of that population.

Laser prostatectomy of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostate enlargement: a critical review of evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Different transurethral prostatic laser systems are available. In 2011, new Oxford evidence levels (LoEs) were published with significant changes compared with the former version. They are easier to use and incorporate more clinical aspects. Randomized trials of laser systems used before 2002, except Holmium laser, were not included in this critical evidence analysis, as these techniques are not in clinical use any more.

RECENT FINDINGS

Twenty-five [18 Holmium enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and seven photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP)] randomized trials covering transurethral electroresection of the prostate or HoLEP, PVP or Thulium laser enucleation were identified. According to evidence levels, there is a large gap in terms of long-term follow-up. The majority of randomised controlled trials are of low quality. Typically with HoLEP, many articles were published covering the same patient population (LoE II). Only one randomised controlled trial was published with Tm:YAG prostatectomy (LoE II) and none with diode lasers (980-1340 nm, LoE IV-V). Large cohort studies (LoE III-IV) provide additional evidence for PVP and HoLEP, typically for subgroups.

SUMMARY

In 2011, higher evidence on HoLEP and PVP has been published. Evidence levels for HoLEP and PVP are comparable with meta-analysis (LoE II). However, evidence that laser prostatectomy is better than transurethral electroresection of the prostate in terms of efficacy is lacking (LoE II). All lasers are safer in terms of perioperative bleeding (LoE II).