Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Journal subject
Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
BMC Neurol ; 14: 136, 2014 Jun 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24950993

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pathogenic autoantibodies targeting the recently identified leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein and the subunit 1 of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor induce autoimmune encephalitis. A comparison of brain metabolic patterns in 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography of anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein and anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis patients has not been performed yet and shall be helpful in differentiating these two most common forms of autoimmune encephalitis. METHODS: The brain 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose uptake from whole-body positron emission tomography of six anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis patients and four patients with anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein encephalitis admitted to Hannover Medical School between 2008 and 2012 was retrospectively analyzed and compared to matched controls. RESULTS: Group analysis of anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate encephalitis patients demonstrated regionally limited hypermetabolism in frontotemporal areas contrasting an extensive hypometabolism in parietal lobes, whereas the anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein syndrome was characterized by hypermetabolism in cerebellar, basal ganglia, occipital and precentral areas and minor frontomesial hypometabolism. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography study provides novel evidence for distinct brain metabolic patterns in patients with anti-leucine rich glioma inactivated 1 protein and anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis.


Subject(s)
Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis/diagnostic imaging , Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis/metabolism , Brain Chemistry/physiology , Encephalitis/diagnostic imaging , Encephalitis/metabolism , Glucose/metabolism , Proteins/immunology , Adult , Aged , Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis/psychology , Autoantibodies/immunology , Encephalitis/immunology , Female , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Humans , Intracellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins , Male , Middle Aged , Positron-Emission Tomography , Radiopharmaceuticals , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies
2.
Exp Ther Med ; 10(4): 1283-1292, 2015 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26622479

ABSTRACT

Anti-N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor encephalitis is the most common type of encephalitis in the spectrum of autoimmune encephalitis defined by antibodies targeting neuronal surface antigens. In the present study, the clinical spectrum of this disease is presented using instructive cases in correlation with the anti-NMDA receptor antibody titers in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and serum. A total of 7 female patients admitted to the hospital of Hannover Medical School (Hannover, Germany) between 2008 and 2014 were diagnosed with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis. Among these patients, 3 cases were selected to illustrate the range of similar and distinct clinical features across the spectrum of the disease and to compare anti-NMDA antibody levels throughout the disease course. All patients received immunosuppressive treatment with methylprednisolone, intravenous immunoglobulin and/or plasmapheresis, followed in the majority of patients by second-line therapy with rituximab and cyclophosphamide. The disease course correlated with NMDA receptor antibody titers, and to a greater extent with the ratio between antibody titer and protein concentration. A favorable clinical outcome with a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of ≤1 was achieved in 4 patients, 1 patient had an mRS score of 2 after 3 months of observation only, whereas 2 patients remained severely impaired (mRS score 4). Early and aggressive immunosuppressive treatment appears to support a good clinical outcome; however, the clinical signs and symptoms differ distinctively and treatment decisions have to be made on an individual basis.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL