RESUMO
Introduction: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rare disease that affects almost 0.8-1.9 cases per 100,000 people worldwide every year. This is the most prevalent cause of subacute flaccid paralyzing illness today. It is a subacute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy; the typical scenario involves ascending symmetrical flaccid paralysis, but in some circumstances, sensory, autonomic, and cranial neuropathy may also be involved. Several vaccines have been found to have complications since the previous century. Numerous case reports of GBS in the literature have been reported following COVID-19 vaccines in recent times. Objective: This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive examination of GBS cases that have been reported after COVID-19 vaccines; to analyze the descriptive statistical analysis of data gathered regarding clinical, laboratory, electrophysiological, and radiological characteristics; to discuss, based on the available evidence, whether the disease has a preference for a particular vaccine type; and to speculate on the potential pathogenesis. Methodology: This review has been carried out by recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Result: Reviewing 60 case reports illustrated that most of them are from the USA (18.1%) and the majority of affected individuals were males (60%). The results favored the association between vector-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, particularly AstraZeneca vaccine, and the GBS. The mean of symptoms onset is 11.4 days. The results of diagnostic tests such as LP are consistent mostly with albumin-cytological dissociation (81.81%), where brain and spine MRI was unremarkable in 59.52%. Regarding electrodiagnostic tests, AIDP is the most common variant (61.81%). The management was not consistent among the case reports. However, IVIG is the most frequent way of treating these patients (68.33%). The functional outcome was documented in 47 patients; 65% improved with medical management. Conclusion: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of reported cases of GBS following COVID-19 vaccines and descriptive statistical analysis of collected data on clinical, laboratory, electrophysiological, and radiological features, to discuss, based on available results, whether the disease has a predilection to a specific vaccine type and to speculate the potential pathogenesis.
RESUMO
Background: Spontaneous simultaneous bilateral basal ganglia hemorrhage (SSBBGH) is an extremely rare condition with only a few published case reports and series. However, there is no systematic review that has been published yet. Objective: The study aims to conduct a systematic review on spontaneous simultaneous bilateral basal ganglion bleeding and a descriptive statistical analysis of collected data on epidemiology, clinical features, etiology, therapeutic approach and prognosis. This review aims to be a clinical reference for busy clinicians when they are faced with such a rare condition. Methodology: This review has been carried out in accordance with recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Review of 60 cases showed that SSBBGH affected predominantly male patients (70%) with an average age of 50.8 ± 15.33 years and the male-to-female ratio was 2.5:1. The female patients tend to be older with an average age of 54.22 ± 16.67 years. Location of SSBBGHwas more common in the putamen (90% vs 10% non-putaminal). SSBBGH posed a significant mortality rate (33.33%). Among patients who survived, only 40.6% (13/32 report) have had favorable outcomes (mRS ≤2) and the remaining 59.4% (19/32) ended up with poor functional status (mRS ≥3-5). The most common implicated etiologies were hypertension followed by alcohol intoxication. Conclusion: SSBBGH is a rare clinical entity with significant morbidity and mortality. Systemic approach can lead to early recognition of etiology and prompt treatment. Hypertension and the putamen are the most common etiology and location of SSBBGH, respectively. History of hypertension and age can help narrow differential diagnosis and limit unnecessary testing or intervention.
