Dear Sir, In 2006 the European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS) provided guidelines [1] on the diagnosis and management of the post-polio syn-drome (PPS). Thus the diagnosis of PPS should be reserved only for patients who clinically and/or by laboratory means present a confi rmed history of paralytic polio. Secondly, they should have recovered completely or almost completely and have stayed stable neurologically and functionally for at least 15 y after the acute poliovirus infection. Symptoms and signs of PPS include fatigue and gradually increasing muscular weakness, muscle atrophy and pain, some-times combined with arthralgia and intolerance to cold. Furthermore, according to the criteria adopted by the EFNS consensus group, symptoms and clini-cal observations must not be explicable by reference to another neurological diagnosis. PPS is by defi nition related to a previous paretic poliovirus infection, but the pathogenesis of the pro-gressive chronic muscle weakness is still essentially unknown. Several hypotheses for the pathophysiol-ogy of PPS have been discussed. One of these refers to the possible persistence of poliovirus in the central nervous system (CNS). The advances made in molecular poliovirus in the 1990s, with new cell and animal models – studies reviewed by Blondel et al. [2] – suggest that at least under certain experimental conditions the poliovirus infection might persist for a considerable time without killing cultured cells or infected animals. Using the polymerase chain reac-tion (PCR), attempts were made to trace poliovirus RNA sequences in cerebrospinal fl uid (CSF), blood lymphocytes and post-mortem PPS tissues. Initially, observations in PPS patients [3,4] were interpreted as compatible with persisting CNS polio or other enterovirus infection. However, the possible associa-tion of PPS and poliovirus persistency has gradually lost most of its relevance. Thus it has not been pos-sible, as yet, to associate the development of PPS with a persistent CNS poliovirus infection [5,6]. Hypothetically, cell destructive immune reactions might in a multitude of ways contribute to motor neuron degeneration such as that seen in PPS. A plethora of immune reactions may be pivotal, affect-ing life-span and functions of motor neurons. In par-ticular, reactions related to autoimmunity have been looked for, testing possible implications of B- as well as T-cell-mediated immunity. PPS patients display CSF mononuclear cells expressing mRNAs for tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF- α), interferon gamma (IFN- γ), interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-10 [7]. Although the impact of cytokines on immune reac-tions and infl ammation in PPS has not been studied in detail, it may be assumed that while IL-4 and IL-10 will modify and suppress adverse infl amma-tory reactions, the presence of TNF- α and IFN- γ may promote this response. The neutrophil and monocyte nicotinamide ade-nine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) oxidase has a central role in infl ammation by the release of reac-tive oxygen species ( ‘ oxygen radicals ’ ) such as super-oxide anions and hydrogen peroxide (H
Read full abstract