ArticleSAGE open medicine2019
Rescue treatment in patients with poorly responsive Guillain-Barre syndrome.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin retreatment amongst Guillain-Barré syndrome patients who poorly responded to initial IVIG cycle: a systematic review.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Shaping the role of plasma exchange in autoimmune neurology: lessons learned from 67 years and over 90,000 procedures.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025Review
- Course and Treatment of a Rare Neurological Sequelae After COVID-19: Miller Fisher Syndrome.Cureus · 2022Article
- Are Repeated Cycles of Intravenous Immunoglobulin Justified in Patients With Poorly Responsive Guillain-Barré Syndrome?The Neurohospitalist · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of rescue treatment (intravenous immunoglobulin or plasma exchange) in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome who did not respond or deteriorated after the initial management with intravenous immunoglobulin.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of the medical records of patients who responded poorly or did not respond to intravenous immunoglobulin treatment. The disability parameters of those who received second-line treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin or plasma exchange (20 patients) were compared with those who did not receive second-line treatment (19 patients).
resultsThere was a statistically significant improvement in disability scores at 1 month in the patients who received the rescue treatment (p = 0.033). However, there was no significant difference in the disability scores at 3 and 6 months, or in length of intensive care unit stay.
conclusionOur study showed that a second course of treatment to carefully selected patients may be beneficial.
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.