This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (131)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Definition, Etiology, and Review of 1,100 Cases

FELIX LENEMAN, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1966;118(2):139-144.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Definition

THERE is a difference of opinion among medical writers as to what constitutes the Guillain-Barré syndrome. Regardless of their country of origin, most authors fall either into French or Anglo-American groups which disagree as to the nomenclature, clinical findings, and laboratory data of the neurological disease under consideration.

Mésentente Cordiale.

—Misunderstanding due to errors in translation aggravate a semantic controversy which was already in evidence at the time of World War I, when several cases of motor and sensory paralysis were observed among the troops fighting in France. Guillain, Barré, and Strohl,¹ who reported the cerebrospinal fluid and electromyographic findings on two cases of "radiculoneuritis" observed in French soldiers, thought the illness they described to be a new entity, of toxic or infectious origin. On the other hand Holmes,² Bradford,³ Casamajor,⁴ and Kennedy,⁵ reporting independently their observations in British troops, agreed that they were all discussing the same illness, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
SAN FRANCISCO

Footnotes
Received for publication Feb 16, 1966; accepted May 6.

Reprint requests to 2255 Van Ness Ave, San Francisco 94109.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?