Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Keeping it simple: is there a need for the various subtyping of axonal forms of Guillain–Barré syndrome?
  1. Nobuhiro Yuki1,
  2. Nortina Shahrizaila2
  1. 1Departments of Microbiology and Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
  2. 2Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  1. Correspondence to Professor N Yuki, Department of Microbiology, National University of Singapore, 5 Science Drive 2, Blk MD4A, Level 5, Singapore 117597, Singapore; micyuki{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) can be classified into demyelinating and axonal forms based on the underlying pathogenesis. The axonal form of GBS was further classified into two subtypes, acute motor axonal neuropathy (AMAN) and acute motor and sensory axonal neuropathy (AMSAN).1 Capasso et al2 have elegantly demonstrated that sensory fibres are often subclinically involved in AMAN through serial sensory nerve conduction studies (see page 664). They have also shown that reversible conduction failure occurs in sensory as well as motor fibres in AMAN and AMSAN. The authors concluded that both subtypes form a continuous spectrum.

The pathology of AMAN and AMSAN are similar, and both conditions can be preceded by Campylobacter jejuni enteritis.1 …

View Full Text


  • Linked article 238311.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles