Viral lumbosacral radiculitis (Elsberg syndrome) in Denmark
Résumé fourni par la source
PURPOSE: To describe clinical features and outcomes of viral lumbosacral radiculitis (Elsberg syndrome). METHODS: Nationwide population-based cohort study of all adults hospitalised for viral lumbosacral radiculitis at departments of infectious diseases in Denmark from 2015 to 2020. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with viral lumbosacral radiculitis were included (mean annual incidence: 1.2/1,000,000 adults). The median age was 35 years (IQR 27-43), and 22/28 (79%) were female. All patients had urinary retention, with 17/28 (61%) needing a catheter. On admission, at least one sign or symptom of meningitis (headache, neck stiffness, photophobia/hyperacusis) was present in 18/22 (82%). Concurrent genital herpetic lesions were present in 11/24 (46%). The median cerebrospinal fluid leukocyte count was 153 cells/µL (IQR 31-514). Magnetic resonance imaging showed radiculitis/myelitis in 5/19 (26%). The microbiological diagnosis was herpes simplex virus type 2 in 19/28 (68%), varicella-zoster virus in 2/28 (7%), and unidentified in 7/28 (25%). Aciclovir/valaciclovir was administered in 27/28 (96%). At 30 days after discharge, 3/27 (11%) had persistent urinary retention with need of catheter. At 180 days after discharge, moderate disabilities (Glasgow Outcome Scale score of 4) were observed in 5/25 (20%). CONCLUSIONS: Urinary retention resolved within weeks in most patients with viral lumbosacral radiculitis, but moderate disabilities according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale were common at the end of follow-up.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Viral lumbosacral radiculitis (Elsberg syndrome) in Denmark
- Date Crossref
- 02/11/2023
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.