Skip to main content
Download PDF

Relative frequencies and clinical features of Guillain-Barré Syndrome before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in North China

BMC Infectious Diseases volume 24, Article number: 541 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Objective

Most studies investigated the relationship between COVID-19 and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) by comparing the incidence of GBS before and during the pandemic of COVID-19. However, the findings were inconsistent, probably owing to varying degrees of the lockdown policy. The quarantine requirements and travel restrictions in China were lifted around December 7, 2022. This study aimed to explore whether the relative frequency of GBS increased during the major outbreak in the absence of COVID-19-mandated social restrictions in China.

Methods

GBS patients admitted to the First Hospital, Shanxi Medical University, from December 7, 2022 to February 20, 2023, and from June, 2017 to August, 2019 were included. The relative frequencies of GBS in hospitalized patients during different periods were compared. The patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection within six weeks prior to GBS onset formed the COVID-GBS group and non-COVID-GBS group, respectively.

Results

The relative frequency of GBS among hospitalized patients during the major outbreak of COVID-19 (13/14,408) was significantly higher than that before the COVID-19 epidemic (29/160,669, P < 0.001). More COVID-GBS patients (11/13) presented AIDP subtype than non-COVID-GBS cases (10/27, P = 0.003). The mean interval between onset of infective symptoms and GBS was longer in COVID-GBS (21.54 ± 11.56 days) than in non-COVID-GBS (5.76 ± 3.18 days, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

COVID-19 significantly increased the incidence of GBS. Most COVID-GBS patients fell into the category of AIDP, responded well to IVIg, and had a favorable prognosis.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in late 2019 and has caused a pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) [1]. Several immune-mediated neurological disorders after COVID-19 infection have been reported, including Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) [2].

GBS is an important cause of acute flaccid paralysis and is characterized by symmetrical weakness of the limbs, with or without cranial and sensory nerve deficits, and hyporeflexia or areflexia [3]. The subtypes of GBS include acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (AIDP), acute motor axonal neuropathy (AMAN), Miller Fisher syndrome (MFS), pharyngeal-cervical-brachial weakness (PCB), acute motor sensory axonal neuropathy (AMSAN) and paraparesis [4]. GBS typically occurs after an infectious disease in which an aberrant immune response damage peripheral nerves [4]. Molecular mimicry is proposed as a leading mechanism for the potential link between certain infections and the onset of GBS, where the immune response to pathogens could mistakenly target neural tissues due to similarities in protein structures [5]. Pathogens causing antecedent infections related to GBS contains Campylobacter Jejuni, cytomegalovirus, Zika virus, Epstein-Barr virus, Mycoplasma pneumonia, Haemophilus influenzae, Japanese encephalitis virus, influenza A virus, chikungunya virus, and dengue virus [4,5,6].

An association between COVID-19 and the subsequent development of GBS has been observed, with an increasing number of cases reported globally [7]. SARS-CoV-2 may trigger GBS through molecular mimicry, aligning with known infectious precipitants [8]. Most previous studies attempted to investigate the relationship between COVID-19 and GBS by comparing the incidence of GBS before and during the pandemic [9,10,11]. However, the findings were inconsistent probably owning to varying degrees of the lockdown policy [10, 11]. The association between COVID-19 and GBS should be explored in the absence of COVID-19-mandated social restrictions.

The sudden change of public health policy regarding COVID-19 in China around December 7, 2022 caused an immediate large-scale outbreak of infections across the entire country lasting for approximately 2 months. It was estimated that 80% people were infected in this major outbreak [12]. The period gave a good opportunity to figure out the relationship between COVID-19 and GBS. This study aimed to compare the relative frequencies of GBS during the major outbreak at the end of 2022 and before COVID-19 pandemic, and investigate the distinctive clinical characteristics and prognosis of GBS associated with COVID-19.

Methods

Study design and participants

The present study was a retrospective, observational, single-center study investigating the potential relationship between COVID-19 and GBS. The major outbreak began from December 7, 2022 and subsided around January 20, 2023 (Fig. 1a-b). All of the GBS patients admitted to the First Hospital, Shanxi Medical University, from December 7, 2022 to February 20, 2023, and from June, 2017 to August, 2019 were included. The diagnosis of GBS was established using a previous criterion [13]. The relative frequencies of GBS before (from June, 2017 to August, 2019) and during the major outbreak (from December 7, 2022 to February 20, 2023) were compared. As cold season GBS peak has been reported [14], we also calculated the relative frequencies of GBS before and during the major outbreak within the same period across different years.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The daily number of reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and positive rate of COVID-19 testing in Chinese mainland (a-b) and the weekly number of COVID-Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) cases in our hospital (c) during the COVID-19 pandemic at the end of 2022. The COVID-19 was diagnosed based on SARS-Cov-2 RNA detection (a) or SARS-CoV-2 antigen (b)

Full size image

The patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection within six weeks prior to GBS onset formed the COVID-GBS group and non-COVID-GBS group, respectively. Another 110 COVID-19 hospitalized patients without GBS during the major outbreak were randomly selected as COVID-non-GBS group. None of these 110 patients had clinical symptoms or a diagnosis of GBS during hospitalization.

Information was collected from medical records, including demographic characteristics, related pre-illness conditions, clinical symptoms and signs, severity, Medical Research Council (MRC)-sumscores at nadir and discharge [15], laboratory and electrophysiological data, and treatment. The prognosis of COVID-GBS was investigated by telephone interview within three months after onset with GBS disability scale [16]. The clinical characteristics were compared between COVID-GBS and non-COVID-GBS and between COVID-GBS and COVID-non-GBS.

The diagnosis of GBS was made by a consensus of two neurologists in the Department of Neurology at our center on the basis of clinical presentation, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis, and electrophysiological studies recorded during hospitalization. The diagnoses of AMAN and AIDP were confirmed using Hadden’s electrodiagnostic criteria [17]. AMSAN was diagnosed by an absence of demyelinating features, as in Hadden’s criteria, and reduction in sensory nerve action potential amplitude < 50% of the lower limit of normal in at least two nerves [18, 19]. The COVID-19 was diagnosed based on SARS-Cov-2 RNA detection by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or SARS-CoV-2 antigen. The severity of COVID-19 was classified into asymptomatic or mild, moderate, severe and critical types according to the China COVID-19 guideline [20].

Statistics

Continuous data were expressed as means ± standard deviation (SD) or medians (range), and discrete variables were expressed as absolute values and percentages. Relative frequencies of GBS in patients hospitalized were calculated and compared between different periods with Poisson test. Percentages were compared between groups using Fisher exact test. Student t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare continuous variables depending on the distribution types. Two-tailed P-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Descriptive statistics and preliminary data processing were performed using SPSS version 25.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, New York). Advanced analyses, including the Poisson test, were conducted with R statistical software (version 4.2.3, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing). GraphPad Prism version 9.0 was used for the graphical representation.

Results

Epidemiological dynamics of the outbreak

According to the report from Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CCDC) [21], the outbreak of COVID-19 at the end of 2022 occurred between December 2022 and January 2023 (Fig. 1a-b). In total, 13 cases of GBS were diagnosed around the period, all of which had suffered from COVID-19 within six weeks prior to GBS onset. The first case developed symptoms of GBS at December 21, 2022 on week 3 of the outbreak, while the peaks of the COVID-19 epidemic and GBS cases were reached on week 3 and 5, respectively (Fig. 1c).

The relative frequency of GBS among all patients hospitalized in our hospital between December 7, 2022 and February 20, 2023 was 13/14,408 (0.090%). There were 29 cases with GBS identified between June, 2017 and August, 2019 in our hospital, with a relative frequency of 29/160,669 (0.018%). The relative frequency of GBS during the major outbreak of COVID-19 was significantly higher than that before the COVID-19 epidemic (Poisson test, RR 5.00, 95%CI 2.39–9.92, P < 0.001, Table 1). To exclude the seasonal effect, the relative frequency of GBS between December 7, 2017 and February 20, 2018 was calculated (3/12,513, 0.024%), also revealing a higher frequency during the major outbreak (Poisson test, RR 3.76, 95%CI 1.03–20.59, P = 0.041).

Table 1 The demographic and clinical characteristics between COVID-GBS and non-COVID-GBS
Full size table

Clinical characteristics of COVID-GBS and non-COVID-GBS

The demographics and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-GBS and non-COVID-GBS are shown in Table 1. The mean age of patients with COVID-GBS was 53.92 ± 18.24 years and most were male (12/13). The age and sex differences between the two groups were comparable (P > 0.05). AIDP was the chief subtype in patients with COVID-GBS (11/13), and AMAN was more prevalent in non-COVID-GBS (15/27, P = 0.003). Correspondingly, more non-COVID-GBS patients (11/29) reported preceding gastrointestinal symptoms than COVID-GBS patients (0/13, P = 0.009). The mean interval between onset of infective symptoms and GBS was longer in COVID-GBS (21.54 ± 11.56 days) than in non-COVID-GBS (5.76 ± 3.18 days, P < 0.001). All but one case with COVID-19 developed GBS while the symptoms of COVID-19 going away. Cranial nerve involvement was more common in COVID-GBS (10/13) than in non-COVID-GBS (11/29, P = 0.019). The intervals between GBS onset and nadir and MRC-sumscores at nadir were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CSF albuminocytologic dissociation (cell count < 50 cell/µl with elevated CSF proteins) [22] was noted in more than two-thirds of patients in both groups (P = 0.0682). The protein levels in CSF were significantly higher in COVID-GBS than in non-COVID-GBS (P = 0.021). Antiganglioside antibodies were uncommonly detected (2/9) in COVID-GBS, but the difference between the two groups was not significant (P = 0.596).

Most patients in both groups were treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg). The lengths of hospital stays were similar between the two groups (P = 0.469), and the severity at nadir and discharge was comparable between the two groups as reflected by MRC-sumscores (P = 0.257). Most patients with COVID-GBS responded well to IVIg and they achieved a median GBS disability score of 2 (able to walk 10 m or more without assistance but unable to run) within 3 months from a median score of 4 at nadir.

Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in patients with GBS and non-GBS

The clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-GBS and COVID-non-GBS are shown in Table 2. Compared with COVID-GBS group (51 [27–85]), COVID-non-GBS patients were older (73[14–94], P < 0.002). Patients with COVID-non-GBS had a more-balanced gender ratio with male accounting for 56.4% (P < 0.012). Patients in the COVID-non-GBS group (3 [1-26]) had longer durations of COVID-19 respiratory symptoms before admission than those in the COVID-GBS group (7 [0–30], P = 0.033). The lengths of hospital stays were similar between the two groups (P = 0.382). COVID-non-GBS patients had more severe symptoms of COVID-19 than COVID-GBS patients. More than two-thirds of COVID-GBS patients (9/13, 69.2%) were asymptomatic or mild types of COVID-19, while only 21.8% in COVID-non-GBS group fell into the corresponding types (9/13 vs. 24/110, P = 0.001).

Table 2 The demographic and clinical characteristics between COVID-GBS and COVID-non-GBS
Full size table

Discussion

In this study, we found that there was a sudden increase in the number of GBS patients during the peak pandemic months, indicating an association between COVID-19 and GBS. Previous studies investigated the relationship between COVID-19 and GBS mainly by comparing the incidence of GBS before and during the pandemic [9,10,11]. The majority of the studies resulted in negative outcomes [9,10,11]. In fact, other factors in addition to COVID-19 affected the incidence of GBS. Strict lockdown policy reduced the number of GBS patients [10, 11]. A low prevalence of COVID-19 might diminish its effect on GBS [10]. During the major outbreak in China starting from December 7, 2022, 80% people were infected in the absence of social restrictions. Under this background, the relative frequency of GBS in hospitalized patients in the same hospital during the major outbreak in China was 5-fold higher than that before the epidemic of COVID-19 in the present study, which provided additional evidence for that COVID-19 was associated with GBS. Case-control studies are commonly used to look at factors associated with diseases [23]. One case-control study conducted in Spain revealed that SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a 6.3-fold increase in the incidence of GBS [24]. Another nested case-control study also suggested that SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with increased risk of GBS [25].

The preceding infections influence the subtypes of GBS. C. jejuni and Zika virus infections are strongly associated with AMAN [26]. Most patients with GBS after influenza virus infection are categorized into AIDP [27]. AMAN was the most prevalent type of GBS in China and in our region [28, 29]. However, during the major outbreak, nearly all of the cases (11/13) with GBS were classified as AIDP, which was consistent with previous studies [7, 30], providing phenotypic evidence of association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and GBS. Accordingly, COVID-GBS patients exhibited higher prevalence of cranial nerve involvement and CSF protein concentrations, similar to patients with AIDP [4, 31].

The symptoms of COVID-19 in most patients with COVID-GBS were mild in this study, different from previous case reports [7], which indicated that occurrence of GBS was independent of the severity of COVID-19. At the time of GBS onset, the symptoms of COVID-19 disappeared in most COVID-GBS patients, suggesting a course of immune-mediated disease rather than virus damaging directly.

Although COVID-19 increases the incidence of GBS, it is not known whether the immune response toward SARS-CoV-2 damage peripheral nerves. An alternative hypothesis is that there is a secondary infection due to immune suppression caused by COVID-19, which induces GBS [32, 33]. Zhu et al. revealed that 242 of 257 COVID-19 patients (94.2%) were co-infected with one or more respiratory pathogens, several of which could cause GBS, including Haemophilus influenzae, Epstein-Barr virus, influenza A virus, Mycoplasma pneumonia, and cytomegalovirus [34]. In the present study, the COVID-GBS patients had a significantly longer average interval (21.54 ± 11.6 days) between preceding infections and GBS than those with non-COVID-GBS (5.76 ± 3.18 days), which supported the hypothesis. A systemic review included 436 COVID-GBS patients also indicated a similar mean interval (19 days) [35]. On the contrary, for example, the median time between infectious to neurologic symptoms was 3, 5 and 6 days in GBS patients associated with C. jejuni, Japanese encephalitis virus, and Zika virus infection, respectively [36,37,38]. An epidemiological study conducted in Finland revealed a mean interval of 12.4 days [39]. It is reasonable to speculate that a secondary infection following COVID-19 causes GBS, and therefore the interval between SARS-CoV-2 infection and GBS gets longer. Further evidence was needed to elucidate the molecular mechanism why COVID-19 increases the incidence of GBS [40].

Limitations

There are several limitations to our study. First, the study has a small sample size, which increases the sampling error. Meanwhile, this retrospective pilot study may have omitted some key information, and the completeness of the original data cannot be assured due to the nature of data collection post-case identification. Second, we recruited patients from a single hospital and the precise number of COVID-19 patients in the region was not available, and thus the incidence of GBS in COVID-19 patients could only be approximatively calculated and compared. Third, while our study suggests a potential link between secondary infections and the development of COVID-GBS, we did not specifically test for the immunoreactivity of the most prevalent infections in our geographic region among the patients. This limitation means that our conclusions are based on clinical inference rather than direct immunological evidence, which could provide a more definitive causal relationship.

Conclusions

COVID-19 significantly increased the incidence of GBS. Most COVID-GBS patients fell into the category of AIDP, responded well to IVIg, and had a favorable prognosis. Further studies investigating the co-infected pathogens among COVID-GBS patients and focusing on the molecular mechanisms of the association between COVID-19 and GBS should be conducted.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

References

  1. Hu B, Guo H, Zhou P, Shi ZL. Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2021;19(3):141–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beghi E, Giussani G, Westenberg E, Allegri R, Garcia-Azorin D, Guekht A, Frontera J, Kivipelto M, Mangialasche F, Mukaetova-Ladinska EB, et al. Acute and post-acute neurological manifestations of COVID-19: present findings, critical appraisal, and future directions. J Neurol. 2022;269(5):2265–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Shahrizaila N, Lehmann HC, Kuwabara S. Guillain-Barre syndrome. Lancet. 2021;397(10280):1214–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. van den Berg B, Walgaard C, Drenthen J, Fokke C, Jacobs BC, van Doorn PA. Guillain-Barre syndrome: pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. Nat Rev Neurol. 2014;10(8):469–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nagappa M, Dutta D, Debnath M, Seshagiri D, Sreekumaran Nair B, Das S, Wahatule R, Sinha S, Ravi V, Taly A. Impact of antecedent infections on the antibodies against gangliosides and ganglioside complexes in Guillain-Barré syndrome: a correlative study. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2022, 25(3).

  6. Dutta D, Debnath M, Nagappa M, Das SK, Wahatule R, Sinha S, Taly AB, Ravi V. Antecedent infections inGuillain-Barrésyndrome patients from south India. J Peripheral Nerv Syst. 2021;26(3):298–306.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Abu-Rumeileh S, Abdelhak A, Foschi M, Tumani H, Otto M. Guillain-Barre syndrome spectrum associated with COVID-19: an up-to-date systematic review of 73 cases. J Neurol. 2021;268(4):1133–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dutta D. NEUROLOGICAL IMPACT OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LESSONS & CAUTIONS. COVID-19 pandemic update 2020. Volume 8. Royal Book; Apr 2023. pp. 73–83.

  9. Filosto M, Cotti Piccinelli S, Gazzina S, Foresti C, Frigeni B, Servalli MC, Sessa M, Cosentino G, Marchioni E, Ravaglia S, et al. Guillain-Barre syndrome and COVID-19: an observational multicentre study from two Italian hotspot regions. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2021;92(7):751–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Keddie S, Pakpoor J, Mousele C, Pipis M, Machado PM, Foster M, Record CJ, Keh RYS, Fehmi J, Paterson RW, et al. Epidemiological and cohort study finds no association between COVID-19 and Guillain-Barre syndrome. Brain. 2021;144(2):682–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hafsteinsdóttir B, Dalemo E, Elíasdóttir Ó, Ólafsson E, Axelsson MJN. Decreased incidence of Guillain-Barré syndrome during the COVID-19 pandemic: a Retrospective Population-based study. 2023, 57(1):1–6.

  12. Fu D, He G, Li H, Tan H, Ji X, Lin Z, Hu J, Liu T, Xiao J, Liang X et al. Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Infection and Symptoms — China, December 2022–February 2023. In: China CDC Weekly vol. 5: Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention; 2023.

  13. Leonhard SE, Mandarakas MR, Gondim FAA, Bateman K, Ferreira MLB, Cornblath DR, et al. Diagnosis and management of Guillain–Barré syndrome in ten steps. Nat Reviews Neurol. 2019;15(11):671–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Giordano A, Vabanesi M, Dalla Costa G, Cerri F, Comi G, Martinelli V, Fazio R. Assessing seasonal dynamics of Guillain-Barré syndrome with search engine query data. Neurol Sciences: Official J Italian Neurol Soc Italian Soc Clin Neurophysiol. 2019;40(5):1015–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Turan Z, Topaloglu M, Ozyemisci Taskiran O. Medical Research Council-sumscore: a tool for evaluating muscle weakness in patients with post-intensive care syndrome. Crit Care 2020, 24(1).

  16. Hughes RA, Newsom-Davis JM, Perkin GD, Pierce JM. Controlled trial prednisolone in acute polyneuropathy. Lancet. 1978;2(8093):750–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hadden RD, Cornblath DR, Hughes RA, Zielasek J, Hartung HP, Toyka KV, Swan AV. Electrophysiological classification of Guillain-Barre syndrome: clinical associations and outcome. Plasma Exchange/Sandoglobulin Guillain-Barre Syndrome Trial Group. Ann Neurol. 1998;44(5):780–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Feasby TE, Hahn AF, Brown WF, Bolton CF, Gilbert JJ, Koopman WJ. Severe axonal degeneration in acute Guillain-Barre syndrome: evidence of two different mechanisms? J Neurol Sci. 1993;116(2):185–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rees JH, Soudain SE, Gregson NA, Hughes RA. Campylobacter jejuni infection and Guillain-Barre syndrome. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(21):1374–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Diagnosis. and treatment protocol for novel coronavirus infection (Trial version 10). https://www.chinacdc.cn/jkzt/crb/zl/szkb_11803/jszl_11815/202301/t20230107_263258.html. Accessed 1 January 2023.

  21. COVID-19 Clinical and Surveillance Data — December 9. 2022 to March 23, 2023, China. https://weekly.chinacdc.cn/news/covid-surveillance/28edabfb-94af-411c-a4d4-503e35d826fc_en.htm. Accessed 25 March 2023.

  22. Fokke C, van den Berg B, Drenthen J, Walgaard C, van Doorn PA, Jacobs BC. Diagnosis of Guillain-Barre syndrome and validation of Brighton criteria. Brain. 2013;137(1):33–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tenny SKC, Hoffman MR. Case Control studies. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls; 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fragiel M, Miro O, Llorens P, Jimenez S, Pinera P, Burillo G, Martin A, Martin-Sanchez FJ, Garcia-Lamberechts EJ, Jacob J, et al. Incidence, clinical, risk factors and outcomes of Guillain-Barre in Covid-19. Ann Neurol. 2021;89(3):598–603.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bishara HAA, Barnett-Griness O, Bloch S, Cohen S, Najjar-Debbiny R, Gronich N, Auriel E, Saliba W. Association between Guillain-Barré syndrome and COVID-19 infection and vaccination: a Population-based nested case-control study. Neurology. 2023;101(20):e2035–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Drenthen J, Yuki N, Meulstee J, Maathuis EM, van Doorn PA, Visser GH, Blok JH, Jacobs BC. Guillain-Barré syndrome subtypes related to Campylobacter infection. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2011;82(3):300–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Yamana M, Kuwahara M, Fukumoto Y, Yoshikawa K, Takada K, Kusunoki S. Guillain-Barré syndrome and related diseases after influenza virus infection. Neurology(R) Neuroimmunol Neuroinflammation. 2019;6(4):e575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kuwabara S, Yuki N. Axonal Guillain-Barré syndrome: concepts and controversies. Lancet Neurol. 2013;12(12):1180–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zhao F, Wang J, Zhang J, Pang X, Huang S, Chang X, Guo J, Zhang W. Pain in acute motor axonal neuropathy. Muscle Nerve. 2021;64(6):739–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Caress JB, Castoro RJ, Simmons Z, Scelsa SN, Lewis RA, Ahlawat A, Narayanaswami P. COVID-19-associated Guillain-Barre syndrome: the early pandemic experience. Muscle Nerve. 2020;62(4):485–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Al-Hakem H, Doets AY, Stino AM, Zivkovic SA, Andersen H, Willison HJ, Cornblath DR, Gorson KC, Islam Z, Mohammad QD, et al. CSF findings in relation to clinical characteristics, subtype, and Disease Course in patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Neurology. 2023;100(23):e2386–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhou Y, Liao X, Song X, He M, Xiao F, Jin X, Xie X, Zhang Z, Wang B, Zhou C, et al. Severe adaptive Immune suppression may be why patients with severe COVID-19 cannot be discharged from the ICU even after negative viral tests. Front Immunol. 2021;12:755579.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. De Bruyn A, Verellen S, Bruckers L, Geebelen L, Callebaut I, De Pauw I, Stessel B, Dubois J. Secondary infection in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a retrospective single-center evaluation. BMC Infect Dis. 2022;22(1):207.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Zhu X, Ge Y, Wu T, Zhao K, Chen Y, Wu B, Zhu F, Zhu B, Cui L. Co-infection with respiratory pathogens among COVID-2019 cases. Virus Res 2020, 285.

  35. Pimentel V, Luchsinger VW, Carvalho GL, Alcara AM, Esper NB, Marinowic D, Zanirati G, da Costa JC. Guillain-Barre syndrome associated with COVID-19: a systematic review. Brain Behav Immun Health. 2023;28:100578.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Cao-Lormeau VM, Blake A, Mons S, Lastere S, Roche C, Vanhomwegen J, Dub T, Baudouin L, Teissier A, Larre P, et al. Guillain-Barre Syndrome outbreak associated with Zika virus infection in French polynesia: a case-control study. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1531–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Ramos AP, Leonhard SE, Halstead SK, Cuba MA, Castaneda CC, Dioses JA, Tipismana MA, Abanto JT, Llanos A, Gourlay D et al. Guillain-Barre Syndrome Outbreak in Peru 2019 Associated with Campylobacter jejuni infection. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021, 8(2).

  38. Wang G, Li H, Yang X, Guo T, Wang L, Zhao Z, Sun H, Hou X, Ding X, Dou C, et al. Guillain-Barre Syndrome Associated with JEV infection. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(12):1188–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sipila JO, Soilu-Hanninen M. The incidence and triggers of adult-onset Guillain-Barre syndrome in southwestern Finland 2004–2013. Eur J Neurol. 2015;22(2):292–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Malekpour M, Khanmohammadi S, Meybodi MJE, Shekouh D, Rahmanian MR, Kardeh S, Azarpira N. COVID-19 as a trigger of Guillain-Barre syndrome: a review of the molecular mechanism. Immun Inflamm Dis. 2023;11(5):e875.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the China CDC for the use of their data in Fig. 1(a) and (b), which have significantly contributed to the context and analysis presented in our study.

Funding

This study was supported by the Shanxi Science and Technology Department under grant No. 20210302123245.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Yaqian Li and Rongjuan Zhao contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China

    Yaqian Li, Rongjuan Zhao, Ling Li, Huiru Xue, Huaxing Meng, Guanxi Li, Feng Liang, Huiqiu Zhang, Jing Ma, Xiaomin Pang, Juan Wang, Xueli Chang, Junhong Guo & Wei Zhang

  2. First Clinical Medical College, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China

    Yaqian Li, Guanxi Li, Feng Liang, Huiqiu Zhang & Jing Ma

Authors
  1. Yaqian Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rongjuan Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ling Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huiru Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Huaxing Meng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Guanxi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Feng Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Huiqiu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Jing Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Xiaomin Pang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Juan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Xueli Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Junhong Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Wei Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Z.W. designed the study; L.YQ. analyzed and collect the clinical data; Z.W., G.JH., L.L., X.HR., M.HX. and C.XL. provide clinical cases; Z.W. and G.JH. made the final diagnosis of GBS; L.GX., L.F., Z.HQ. and M.J. helped collect the clinical data; P.XM. performed electrophysiological studies; Z.RJ. and W.J. helped analyzed the data; L.YQ. and Z.RJ. wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study has been approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments (NO. KYLL-2023-133). Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

Not Applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Y., Zhao, R., Li, L. et al. Relative frequencies and clinical features of Guillain-Barré Syndrome before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in North China. BMC Infect Dis 24, 541 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09401-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09401-1

Keywords

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us