Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

  1. Filip Eftimov1,
  2. John B Winer2,
  3. Marinus Vermeulen3,
  4. Rob de Haan4,
  5. Ivo N van Schaik1,*

Editorial Group: Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group

Published Online: 30 DEC 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 4 DEC 2012

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001797.pub3


How to Cite

Eftimov F, Winer JB, Vermeulen M, de Haan R, van Schaik IN. Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD001797. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001797.pub3.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Department of Neurology, Amsterdam, Netherlands

  2. 2

    Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Department of Neurology, Birmingham, UK

  3. 3

    University of Amsterdam, Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands

  4. 4

    Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam, Netherlands

*Ivo N van Schaik, Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, PO Box 22700, Amsterdam, 1100 DE, Netherlands. i.n.vanschaik@amc.uva.nl.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New search for studies and content updated (conclusions changed)
  2. Published Online: 30 DEC 2013

SEARCH

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. A flow diagram illustrating the study selection process.
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study. Green = low risk of bias; yellow = unclear risk of bias; red (not shown) = high risk of bias.
[Figure 3]
Figure 3. Funnel plot of comparison: 1 IVIg versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 Significant improvement in disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 1 Significant improvement in disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 2 Significant improvement in disability; GIV approach.
[Analysis 1.3]
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 3 Improvement of 1 point or more on Rankin scale.
[Analysis 1.4]
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 4 Change in mean disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 1.5]
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 5 Change in mean disability score on scale used in study; GIV approach.
[Analysis 1.6]
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 6 Change in mean disability score on Rankin scale.
[Analysis 1.7]
Analysis 1.7. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 7 Change in mean MRC sum score.
[Analysis 1.8]
Analysis 1.8. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 8 Change in mean disability score at 24 weeks.
[Analysis 1.9]
Analysis 1.9. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 9 Serious side effects.
[Analysis 1.10]
Analysis 1.10. Comparison 1 IVIg versus placebo, Outcome 10 Any side effect.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 IVIg versus plasma exchange, Outcome 1 Change in mean disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 3.1]
Analysis 3.1. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 1 Significant improvement in disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 3.2]
Analysis 3.2. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 2 Improvement of 1 point or more on Rankin scale.
[Analysis 3.3]
Analysis 3.3. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 3 Change in mean disability score on scale used in original study (primary analysis).
[Analysis 3.4]
Analysis 3.4. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 4 Change in mean disability score on Rankin scale.
[Analysis 3.5]
Analysis 3.5. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 5 Change in mean MRC sum score.
[Analysis 3.6]
Analysis 3.6. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 6 Serious side effects.
[Analysis 3.7]
Analysis 3.7. Comparison 3 IVIg versus prednisolone, Outcome 7 Any side effect.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 1 Significant improvement in disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 2 Improvement of 1 point or more on Rankin scale.
[Analysis 4.3]
Analysis 4.3. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 3 Change in mean disability score on scale used in original study.
[Analysis 4.4]
Analysis 4.4. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 4 Change in mean disability score on Rankin scale.
[Analysis 4.5]
Analysis 4.5. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 5 Change in mean MRC sum score.
[Analysis 4.6]
Analysis 4.6. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 6 Change in mean disability score at 24 weeks.
[Analysis 4.7]
Analysis 4.7. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 7 Serious side effects.
[Analysis 4.8]
Analysis 4.8. Comparison 4 IVIg versus methylprednisolone, Outcome 8 Any side effect.