PDF(1254 KB)
Efficacy and safety of cyclophosphamide as a sequential immunotherapy drug for anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis in children
ZHU Wei-Wen, LIAO Wei-Ping, YI Yong-Hong, SONG Xing-Wang
Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics ›› 2017, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (6) : 668-671.
PDF(1254 KB)
PDF(1254 KB)
Efficacy and safety of cyclophosphamide as a sequential immunotherapy drug for anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis in children
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cyclophosphamide as a second-line drug in the treatment of children with anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis. Methods Six children with anti-NMDAR encephalitis, who showed poor response to steroids and intravenous immunoglobulin, were given cyclophosphamide as a second-line immunotherapy. Follow-up was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cyclophosphamide. Results After first-line immunotherapy for 1-4 weeks, the six patients had reduced psychiatric symptoms, seizures, and involuntary movements; three patients had an improved level of consciousness and were able to make simple conversations. However, all the patients still showed slow response, as well as cortical dysfunction symptoms such as aphasia, alexia, agraphia, acalculia, apraxia, and movement disorders. The six patients continued to receive cyclophosphamide as a sequential therapy. They were able to answer simple questions 7 days after treatment. Three school-aged patients were able to make simple calculation, had greatly improved reading and writing ability, and almost recovered self-care ability 2-3 weeks later. The cognitive function of the six patients was almost restored to the level before the onset of disease, and their living ability returned to normal 2-3 months later. During the treatment period, there were no adverse reactions or abnormal results of routine blood test and liver and kidney function tests. Conclusions Children with anti-NMDAR encephalitis should be given appropriate immunotherapy as soon as possible. Cyclophosphamide as a sequential therapy has good efficacy and safety.
Anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis / Cyclophosphamide / Immunotherapy / Child
[1] Penny DJ, Vick GW 3rd. Ventricular septal defect[J]. Lancet, 2011, 377(9771):1103-1112.
[2] 王一斌, 华益民, 刘瀚旻, 等. 室间隔缺损经导管关闭术后传导阻滞的相关因素分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2007, 25(12):1002-1004.
[3] Ghaderian M, Merajie M, Mortezaeian H, et al. Efficacy and safety of using amplatzer ductal occluder for transcatheter closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect in pediatrics[J]. Iran J Pediatr, 2015, 25(2):e386.
[4] Lee SM, Song JY, Choi JY, et al. Transcatheter closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect using Amplatzer ductal occluder[J]. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2013, 82(7):1141-1146.
[5] Du RZ, Qian J, Wu J, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy for heart failure induced by left bundle branch block after transcatheter closure of ventricular septal defect[J]. J Geriatr Cardiol, 2014, 11(4):357-362.
[6] Maréchaux S, Guiot A, Castel AL, et al. Relationship between two-dimensional speckle-tracking septal strain and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and left bundle branch block:a prospective pilot study[J]. J Am Soc Echocardiogr, 2014, 27(5):501-511.
[7] Fukuda T, Suzuki T, Kashima I, et al. Shallow stitching close to the rim of the ventricular septal defect eliminates injury to the right bundle branch[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 2002, 74(2):550-555.
[8] Yip WC, Zimmerman F, Hijazi ZM, et al. Heart block and empirical therapy after transcatheler closure of perimembranous ventricular septal defect[J]. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2005, 66(3):436-441.
[9] 戴辰程, 魏淑萍, 郭保静, 等. 室间隔缺损封堵术后持续性完全性左束支传导阻滞外科治疗缓解一例[J]. 中国介入心脏病学杂志, 2010, 18(6):358-359.
[10] Bhardwaj R. Etiology and left ventricular functions in left bundle branch block-a prospective observational study[J]. J Assoc Physicians India, 2016, 64(9):36-38.
[11] Deniz A, Özmen Ç, Akta? H, et al. Electrocardiographic markers of left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with left bundle branch block[J]. Kardiol Pol, 2016, 74(1):25-31.
[12] Ozdemir K, Altunkeser BB, Dani? G, et al. Effect of the isolated left bundle branch block on systolic and diastolic functions of left ventricle[J]. J Am Soc Echocardiogr, 2001, 14(11):1075-1079.
[13] Zanco P, Desideri A, Mobilia G, et al. Effects of left bundle branch block on myocardial FDG PET in patients without significant coronary artery stenoses[J]. J Nucl Med, 2000, 41(6):973-977.
[14] Mozos I, Serban C. The relation between QT interval and T-wave variables in hypertensive patients[J]. J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2011, 3(3):339-344.
[15] Ciobanu A, Gheorghe GS, Ababei M, et al. Dispersion of ventricular repolarization in relation to cardiovascular risk factors in hypertension[J]. J Med Life, 2014, 7(4):545-550.
[16] Rahimi Darabad B, Vatandust J, Pourmousavi Khoshknab MM, el al. Survey of the effect of streptokinase on ventricular repolarization by examining the QT dispersion in patients with acute myocardial infraction in Seyed-Al-Shohada Hospital, Urmia[J]. Glob J Health Sci, 2014, 6(7):74-82.
[17] Bol Raap G, Meijboom FJ, Kappetein AP, et al. Long-term follow-up and quality of life after closure of ventricular septal defect in adults[J]. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2007, 32(2):215-219.
