4.7 Article

Peripheral facial palsy in patients with tick-borne encephalitis

期刊

CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 18, 期 10, 页码 1027-1032

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03719.x

关键词

Borrelia infection; cranial nerves; aetiology; facial palsy; Slovenia; tick-borne encephalitis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18: 10271032 Abstract Although tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) has been recognized in Europe for more than 70 years and has been the topic of numerous reports, information on the involvement of facial nerves in the course of the disease is limited. Our study conducted at a single medical centre revealed that facial nerve involvement in the course of TBE in Central Europe is (i) infrequentit was found in only 11 of 1218 (0.9%) consecutive adult patients diagnosed with TBE; (ii) manifests with unilateral or rarely bilateral peripheral facial palsy (PFP) (nine and two patients, respectively); (iii) appears late in the course of acute illnessin our patients 1020 days after the onset of the meningoencephalitic phase of TBE, and often after defervescence (in 8/11 patients; 613 days after normalization of body temperature); (iv) develops more often in patients with more severe illness, i.e. more frequently in those with encephalitic than in those with meningitic clinical presentation, and more commonly in patients with monophasic than biphasic illness; and (v) has a favourable outcomeour patients had a clinically complete recovery from PFP within 790 (median 30) days after its onset. Moreover, the finding of Borrelia infection in 3/11 (27.3%) patients (diagnosis of confirmed Lyme neuroborreliosis was established in 1/11 patients and two patients fulfilled criteria for possible Lyme neuroborreliosis) suggests that in countries where TBE and Lyme borreliosis are endemic, concomitant infection with Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato should be considered and searched for in patients who develop PFP in the course of TBE.

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