ReviewIrish journal of medical science2016
Outcomes for patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation: a literature review.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanical ventilation, hospitalization time, deaths and disability according to the variants of Guillain-Barré syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica · 2024Pooled it
- Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Adults with Guillain-Barré Syndrome.Neurocritical care · 2023Guideline
- Characteristics and outcomes of patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome who were admitted to the intensive care unit: a retrospective observational study.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Observational
- Clinical predictors for mechanical ventilation assistance in Guillain-Barré syndrome.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Article
- Patients' attitude towards vaccination after Guillain Barré syndrome.Health science reports · 2021Article
- A Predictive Model for Respiratory Failure and Determining the Risk Factors of Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation in Children with Guillain-Barre Syndrome.Iranian journal of child neurology · 2020Article
- Zika virus-induced neurological critical illness in Latin America: Severe Guillain-Barre Syndrome and encephalitis.Journal of critical care · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis is a literature review of outcomes for patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) who require admission to the intensive care unit for mechanical ventilation. Respiratory distress is the leading cause of death in the acute phase, and occurs in about 25 % of patients.
aimsThe aim of this review is to compile, analyse, and summarise the most relevant literature looking at outcomes for Guillain-Barré (GB) patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit and mechanical ventilation.
methodsA PubMed and Google-Scholar literature search was performed using the key words 'Guillain-Barré, Outcomes, Mechanical Ventilation, Prognosis, Mortality, ICU. All 7 papers from the years 2000-2014 which assessed outcomes for GBS patients requiring mechanical ventilation were included, and critically analysed.
resultsThe parameters recorded by these studies looked at mortality, disability, length of hospitalisation, and complications. The mortality of GB patients requiring mechanical ventilation varied from 8.3 to 20 %, Disability was primarily measured by the GBS disability scale. One study deemed that a score of 0-1 was a positive outcome, and found that slightly over half 53.8 % of the patients fulfilled that criteria. Over half of the mechanically ventilated patients were required to be admitted for over 3 weeks. Complications during ICU admission are common, with bed-sores (40 %), pneumonia (30.2 %) and sepsis (17.4) being the most frequently encountered in one study.
conclusionAccurate data are limited by the fact that these studies are retrospective, often covering long periods in the past. Larger, more recent, prospective, multi-centre studies will be required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.