Neurophysiological investigations of hepatic encephalopathy: ISHEN practice guidelines.

By studying neuronal activity through neuronal electrogenesis, neurophysiological investigations provide a functional assessment of the nervous system and, therefore, has been used for quantitative assessment and follow-up of hepatic encephalopathy (HE). The different clinical neurophysiological approaches can be classified depending on the function to explore and their sensitivity to HE. The reliable techniques are those that reflect cortical function, i.e., cognitive-evoked potentials (EPs) (P300 paradigm), electroencephalogram (EEG), visual EPs (latency>100 ms) and somatosensory EPs (SEPs) (latency between 25 and 100 ms). Short-latency EPs (brainstem acoustic EPs, SEPs of a latency<25 ms) are in principle insensitive to HE, but can disclose brainstem conduction deficits due to oedema. SEPs and motor EPs can disclose myelopathies. Because of its parallelism to the clinical examination, clinical neurophysiology can complement the neurological examination: (i) to provide evidence of HE in patients who have normal consciousness; (ii) to rule out, at least under some conditions, disturbances of consciousness due to other causes (e.g. drug-induced disturbances, non-convulsive status epilepticus) with the reservation that the mildest degrees of encephalopathy might be associated with an EEG pattern similar to that induced by drugs; and (iii) to demonstrate the worsening or, conversely improvement, of HE in the follow-up period.

Multicenter case-control study on restless legs syndrome in multiple sclerosis: the REMS study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To verify the existence of a symptomatic form of restless legs syndrome (RLS) secondary to multiple sclerosis (MS) and to identify possible associated risk factors. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, case-control epidemiologic survey. SETTINGS: Twenty sleep centers certified by the Italian Association of Sleep Medicine. PATIENTS: Eight hundred and sixty-one patients affected by MS and 649 control subjects. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASURES AND RESULTS: Data regarding demographic and clinical factors, presence and severity of RLS, the results of hematologic tests, and visual analysis of cerebrospinal magnetic resonance imaging studies were collected. The prevalence of RLS was 19% in MS and 4.2% in control subjects, with a risk to be affected by RLS of 5.4 (95%confidence interval: 3.56-8.26) times greater for patients with MS than for control subjects. In patients with MS, the following risk factors for RLS were significant: older age; longer MS duration; the primary progressive MS form; higher global, pyramidal, and sensory disability; and the presence of leg jerks before sleep onset. Patients with MS and RLS more often had sleep complaints and a higher intake of hypnotic medications than patients with MS without RLS. RLS associated with MS was more severe than that of control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: RLS is significantly associated with MS, especially in patients with severe pyramidal and sensory disability. These results strengthen the idea that the inflammatory damage correlated with MS may induce a secondary form of RLS. As it does in idiopathic cases, RLS has a significant impact on sleep quality in patients with MS; therefore, it should be always searched for, particularly in the presence of insomnia unresponsive to treatment with common hypnotic drugs.

Neuroprotective effect of reduced glutathione on oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

PURPOSE: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the efficacy of glutathione (GSH) in the prevention of oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients treated with a bimonthly oxaliplatin-based regimen were randomized to receive GSH (1,500 mg/m(2) over a 15-minute infusion period before oxaliplatin) or normal saline solution. Clinical neurologic evaluation and electrophysiologic investigations were performed at baseline and after four (oxaliplatin dose, 400 mg/m(2)), eight (oxaliplatin dose, 800 mg/m(2)), and 12 (oxaliplatin dose, 1,200 mg/m(2)) cycles of treatment. RESULTS: At the fourth cycle, seven patients showed clinically evident neuropathy in the GSH arm, whereas 11 patients in the placebo arm did. After the eighth cycle, nine of 21 assessable patients in the GSH arm suffered from neurotoxicity compared with 15 of 19 in the placebo arm. With regard to grade 2 to 4 National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria, 11 patients experienced neuropathy in the placebo arm compared with only two patients in the GSH arm (P =.003). After 12 cycles, grade 2 to 4 neurotoxicity was observed in three patients in the GSH arm and in eight patients in the placebo arm (P =.004). The neurophysiologic investigations (sural sensory nerve conduction) showed a statistically significant reduction of the values in the placebo arm but not in the GSH arm. The response rate was 26.9% in the GSH arm and 23.1% in the placebo arm, showing no reduction in activity of oxaliplatin. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that GSH is a promising drug for the prevention of oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy, and that it does not reduce the clinical activity of oxaliplatin.