4.7 Article

Peripheral neuropathy incidence in inflammatory bowel disease A population-based study

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 80, 期 18, 页码 1693-1697

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182904d16

关键词

-

资金

  1. Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, Rochester Epidemiology Project from the National Institute on Aging [R01 AG034676]
  2. NIH [K08 NS065007-01A1, NS36797]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Our aim was to determine the incidence of peripheral neuropathy in a population-based inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) cohort from Olmsted County, Minnesota. Methods: We retrospectively ascertained neuropathy incidence in a population-based cohort of adult persons newly diagnosed with IBD between 1940 and 2004 in Olmsted County, Minnesota, using the medical records linkage system of the Rochester Epidemiology Project. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of neuropathy. Results: A total of 772 Olmsted County residents aged 18 to 91 years were diagnosed with IBD. After 12,476 person-years, 9 patients developed neuropathy, providing an overall incidence rate of 72 (95% confidence interval [CI] 33-137) cases per 100,000 IBD person-years. The cumulative incidence rates after 10, 20, and 30 years were 0.7% (95% CI 0.0%-1.3%), 0.7% (95% CI 0.0%-1.5%), and 2.4% (95% CI 0.6%-4.6%), respectively. Neuropathy was diagnosed after 1 to 44 years from IBD onset. Only 2 patients had active bowel disease at the time of neuropathy onset. The clinical spectrum consisted of 1) monophasic immune radiculoplexus neuropathy (comorbid diabetes in 2 of 4 patients) and 2) chronic distal sensorimotor polyneuropathy (comorbid diabetes in 2 of 5 patients). Conclusions: Our population-based study suggests that neuropathy is uncommon in the patient population of IBD. Radiculoplexus neuropathy and sensorimotor polyneuropathy were both observed, commonly during periods of bowel disease inactivity. Clinicians should consider other etiologies of neuropathy in patients with IBD.

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

4.7
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