Suppr超能文献

国际吉兰-巴雷综合征结局研究中的电诊断亚型。

Electrodiagnostic subtyping in Guillain-Barré syndrome patients in the International Guillain-Barré Outcome Study.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Department of Neurology, HagaZiekenhuis, The Hague, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Eur J Neurol. 2024 Sep;31(9):e16335. doi: 10.1111/ene.16335. Epub 2024 Jul 4.

Abstract

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.

摘要

背景与目的

在吉兰-巴雷综合征(GBS)中已经制定了各种电诊断标准。但尚未对广泛代表性的 GBS 患者进行这些标准的性能评估。本研究使用国际 GBS 结局研究(IGOS)队列的运动传导数据,比较了两种广泛使用的标准集,并将其与诊断肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)的标准相关联。

方法

在 IGOS 的前 1500 名患者中,有 1137 名(75.8%)患者可提供神经传导研究结果。根据 Hadden 和 Rajabally 提出的神经传导研究标准对这些患者进行分类。

结果

在 1137 项研究中,根据 Hadden 和 Rajabally 的标准,68.3%(N=777)患者的分类结果完全相同:111 例(9.8%)为轴索型,366 例(32.2%)为脱髓鞘型,195 例(17.2%)为不确定型,35 例(3.1%)为不可兴奋型,70 例(6.2%)为正常型。因此,360 项研究(31.7%)的分类结果不同。差异主要表现在以下方面:155 项研究(13.6%)根据 Hadden 标准为脱髓鞘型,而根据 Rajabally 标准为轴索型;122 项研究(10.7%)根据 Hadden 标准为脱髓鞘型,而根据 Rajabally 标准为不确定型;75 项研究(6.6%)根据 Hadden 标准为不确定型,而根据 Rajabally 标准为轴索型。由于 Rajabally 的标准设定了更严格的截止值,因此符合 Rajabally 的脱髓鞘标准的患者少于符合 Hadden 的脱髓鞘标准的患者,这使得更多的患者有资格被 Rajabally 分类为轴索型或不确定型。在 Rajabally 的 234 项(68.6%)轴索型研究中,修订后的埃尔埃斯科里亚尔(ALS)标准得到满足;而在 Hadden 的轴索型病例中,这一比例为 1.8%。

结论和讨论

本研究表明,GBS 的电诊断取决于所使用的标准集,这两个标准集均基于专家意见。因此,有必要重新评估 GBS 的电诊断亚型。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b7c2/11295174/f4557b693ed4/ENE-31-e16335-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验