Incidence and Prevalence of Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyradiculoneuropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Prevalence and incidence rates of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) are required to determine the impact of CIDP on society. We aimed to estimate the prevalence and incidence of CIDP worldwide and to determine the effect of diagnostic criteria on prevalence...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Neuroepidemiology Ročník 52; číslo 3-4; s. 161 - 172
Hlavní autoři: Broers, Merel C., Bunschoten, Carina, Nieboer, Daan, Lingsma, Hester F., Jacobs, Bart C.
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Basel, Switzerland 01.01.2019
Témata:
Humans
Incidence
Observational Studies as Topic - methods
Polyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating - diagnosis
Polyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating - epidemiology
Prevalence
Systematic Review
Systematic review
Prevalence
Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy
Incidence
Meta-analysis
ISSN:0251-5350, 1423-0208, 1423-0208
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background: Prevalence and incidence rates of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) are required to determine the impact of CIDP on society. We aimed to estimate the prevalence and incidence of CIDP worldwide and to determine the effect of diagnostic criteria on prevalence and incidence. Method: A systematic review was conducted for all published incidence and prevalence studies on CIDP until May 18, 2017. Methodological quality was assessed using the Methodological Evaluation of Observational Research checklist. We performed a random effect meta-analysis to estimate pooled prevalence and incidence rates. Results: Of the 907 studies, 11 were included in the systematic review, 5 in the meta-analysis of incidence (818 cases; 220,513,514 person-years) and 9 in the meta-analysis of prevalence (3,160 cases; 160,765,325 population). These studies had a moderate quality. The pooled crude incidence rate was 0.33 per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.21–0.53; I 2  = 95.7%) and the pooled prevalence rate was 2.81 per 100,000 (95% CI 1.58–4.39; I 2 = 99.1%). Substantial heterogeneity in incidence and prevalence across studies seems to be partly explained by using different diagnostic criteria. Conclusion: These findings provide a starting point to estimate the social burden of CIDP and demonstrate the need to reach consensus on diagnostic criteria for CIDP.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:0251-5350
1423-0208
1423-0208
DOI:10.1159/000494291