4.4 Article

SAFETY OF INFLUENZA VACCINATION IN PATIENTS WITH MYASTHENIA GRAVIS: A POPULATION-BASED STUDY

期刊

MUSCLE & NERVE
卷 40, 期 6, 页码 947-951

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mus.21440

关键词

nfluenza; myasthenia gravis; pharmacoepidemiology; self-matched designs; vaccine safety

资金

  1. University of Toronto
  2. Canadian Institutes for Health Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Influenza vaccination has been associated with adverse events including Guillain-Barre syndrome. Because the safety of influenza vaccination in patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) has not been established, some clinicians discourage vaccination for these patients. We explored whether the administration of influenza vaccine to patients with MG might increase the risk of myasthenic crisis. Using population-based healthcare data from Ontario, Canada, from 1992 to 2007, we utilized the self-matched, case-series method of detecting adverse events following vaccination. We studied patients with established myasthenia who were hospitalized for MG within 42 weeks of influenza vaccination. We defined the primary risk interval as the 6 weeks following vaccination. Between January 1, 1992 and March 31, 2006, we identified 3667 hospital admissions for MG. No seasonal trend in MG admissions was evident. In 513 instances, hospitalization occurred within 42 weeks following vaccination in patients previously diagnosed with MG. Among these patients, 266 (52%) were men, the median age was 74 years, and 86 (17%) had previously undergone thymectomy. The estimated relative incidence of admission for MG in the primary risk interval compared with the control interval was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.65-1.09). We found similar results in stratified analyses according to gender, age, and thymectomy status. Vaccination of patients with MG against influenza was not found to be associated with exacerbations of the disease. Our findings do not support the practice of withholding influenza vaccination in patients with MG. Muscle Nerve 40: 947-951, 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据