MyMedR

Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Electrodiagnostic subtyping in Guillain-Barré syndrome: Use of criteria in practice based on a survey study in IGOS

Arends S, Drenthen J, Van den Bergh PYK, Hadden RDM, Shahrizaila N, Dimachkie MM, et al.

J Peripher Nerv Syst, 2022 Sep;27(3):197-205.
PMID: 35700346 DOI: 10.1111/jns.12504

Electrodiagnostic (EDx) studies are helpful in diagnosing and subtyping of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Published criteria for differentiation into GBS subtypes focus on cutoff values, but other items receive less attention, although they may influence EDx subtyping: (a) extensiveness of EDx testing, (b) nerve-specific considerations, (c) distal compound muscle action potential (CMAP)-amplitude requirements, (d) criteria for conduction block and temporal dispersion. The aims of this study were to investigate how these aspects were approached by neuromuscular EDx experts in practice and how this was done in previously published EDx criteria for GBS. A completed questionnaire was returned by 24 (of 49) members of the electrophysiology expertise group from the International GBS Outcome Study. Six published EDx criteria for GBS subtyping were compared regarding these aspects. The indicated minimal number of motor nerves to study varied among respondents and tended to be more extensive in equivocal than normal studies. Respondents varied considerably regarding usage of compression sites for subtyping (median/wrist, ulnar/elbow, peroneal/fibular head): 29% used all variables from all sites, 13% excluded all sites, and 58% used only some sites and/or variables. Thirty-eight percent of respondents required a minimal distal CMAP amplitude to classify distal motor latency as demyelinating, and 58% did for motor conduction velocity. For proximal/distal CMAP-amplitude ratio and F-wave latency, a requisite minimal CMAP amplitude was more often required (79%). Also, the various published criteria sets showed differences on all items. Practical use of EDx criteria for subtyping GBS vary extensively across respondents, potentially lowering the reproducibility of GBS subtyping.
Electrodiagnostic subtyping in Guillain-Barré syndrome patients in the International Guillain-Barré Outcome Study

Arends S, Drenthen J, de Koning L, van den Bergh P, Hadden RDM, Kuwabara S, et al.

Eur J Neurol, 2024 Jul 04.
PMID: 38965709 DOI: 10.1111/ene.16335

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Various electrodiagnostic criteria have been developed in Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Their performance in a broad representation of GBS patients has not been evaluated. Motor conduction data from the International GBS Outcome Study (IGOS) cohort were used to compare two widely used criterion sets and relate these to diagnostic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis criteria.
METHODS: From the first 1500 patients in IGOS, nerve conduction studies from 1137 (75.8%) were available for the current study. These patients were classified according to nerve conduction studies criteria proposed by Hadden and Rajabally.
RESULTS: Of the 1137 studies, 68.3% (N = 777) were classified identically according to criteria by Hadden and Rajabally: 111 (9.8%) axonal, 366 (32.2%) demyelinating, 195 (17.2%) equivocal, 35 (3.1%) inexcitable and 70 (6.2%) normal. Thus, 360 studies (31.7%) were classified differently. The areas of differences were as follows: 155 studies (13.6%) classified as demyelinating by Hadden and axonal by Rajabally; 122 studies (10.7%) classified as demyelinating by Hadden and equivocal by Rajabally; and 75 studies (6.6%) classified as equivocal by Hadden and axonal by Rajabally. Due to more strictly defined cutoffs fewer patients fulfilled demyelinating criteria by Rajabally than by Hadden, making more patients eligible for axonal or equivocal classification by Rajabally. In 234 (68.6%) axonal studies by Rajabally the revised El Escorial (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) criteria were fulfilled; in axonal cases by Hadden this was 1.8%.
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION: This study shows that electrodiagnosis in GBS is dependent on the criterion set utilized, both of which are based on expert opinion. Reappraisal of electrodiagnostic subtyping in GBS is warranted.
Fulltext Electrodiagnosis of Guillain-Barre syndrome in the International GBS Outcome Study: Differences in methods and reference values

Arends S, Drenthen J, van den Bergh P, Franssen H, Hadden RDM, Islam B, et al.

Clin Neurophysiol, 2022 Jun;138:231-240.
PMID: 35078730 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2021.12.014

OBJECTIVE: To describe the heterogeneity of electrodiagnostic (EDx) studies in Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) patients collected as part of the International GBS Outcome Study (IGOS).
METHODS: Prospectively collected clinical and EDx data were available in 957 IGOS patients from 115 centers. Only the first EDx study was included in the current analysis.
RESULTS: Median timing of the EDx study was 7 days (interquartile range 4-11) from symptom onset. Methodology varied between centers, countries and regions. Reference values from the responding 103 centers were derived locally in 49%, from publications in 37% and from a combination of these in the remaining 15%. Amplitude measurement in the EDx studies (baseline-to-peak or peak-to-peak) differed from the way this was done in the reference values, in 22% of motor and 39% of sensory conduction. There was marked variability in both motor and sensory reference values, although only a few outliers accounted for this.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed extensive variation in the clinical practice of EDx in GBS patients among IGOS centers across the regions.
SIGNIFICANCE: Besides EDx variation in GBS patients participating in IGOS, this diversity is likely to be present in other neuromuscular disorders and centers. This underlines the need for standardization of EDx in future multinational GBS studies.

Filters

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links