ArticleIrish journal of medical science2018
Brain biopsies requiring Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease precautions in the Republic of Ireland 2005-2016.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Interventions to reduce the risk of surgically transmitted Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: a cost-effective modelling review.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Establishing a committee for antemortem reviews of suspect Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease cases in Ireland.Irish journal of medical science · 2023Article
- Neuropathology correlates of cognitive assessments.Irish journal of medical science · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsCreutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) risk precautions are required when performing brain biopsies on patients with a dementing illness and in 'risk' groups. The impact on a diagnostic neuropathology service is considerable. We sought to determine if better case selection might reduce the necessity for application of CJD risk precautions.
methodsWe reviewed the clinical information, contributory investigations and final neuropathologic diagnosis in a cohort of patients (n = 21), referred to the National CJD Surveillance Centre between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2016.
resultsOf this 21-patient cohort, five were positive for CJD, four belonged to the 'at risk of CJD' category requiring brain surgery, while the remaining 12 were referred to the National CJD Surveillance Unit with CJD as part of their differential diagnosis. CJD was confirmed in 5/21 (three sporadic [s]CJD, one variant [v]CJD and one iatrogenic [i] CJD). CJD was clinically probable in 4/5 proven CJD patients (80%). The patients (n = 4) in the 'at risk of CJD' group were diagnosed with tumour (n = 2), inflammation (n = 1) and non-specific changes (n = 1). Of the remaining 12 patients (in whom CJD was included in the differential diagnosis), the final neuropathologic diagnoses included tumour (n = 2), neurodegenerative (n = 2), inflammatory (n = 1), metabolic (n = 2), vascular (n = 2) and non-specific gliosis (n = 3).
conclusionsMore often than not, the clinical suspicion of CJD was not borne out by the final neuropathological diagnosis. Failure by clinicians to adhere to the recommended CJD investigation algorithm impacts adversely on the neuropathology workload and causes unnecessary concern among operating theatre, laboratory and nursing personnel.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28803271What 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.