ArticleNeurology international2019
Electrodiagnostic findings in myotonic dystrophy: A study on 12 patients.
Article in Neurology international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating gastrointestinal challenges in genetic myopathies: Diagnostic insights and future directions.World journal of methodology · 2025Article
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
Myotonic dystrophy (DM) is a complex multisystem disease with specific clinical and electrodiagnostic findings. Myotonia can be seen in the distal and proximal muscle groups in upper and lower limbs. There is no established guideline to demonstrate the sensitivity of muscles in the diagnosis of myotonic dystrophy. The aims of this study are to describe common electrodiagnostic findings in patients with DM; and to assess the electrodiagnostic sensitivity of muscles in the diagnosis of DM. In this retrospective study, patients' age, sex, nerve conduction study findings including common upper and lower limbs nerve functions, and needle examination findings were collected and analyzed. A descriptive analysis (with percentage) was performed on the data obtained from the charts. NCS analysis showed more than half of patients had normal sensory and motor NCS findings. In 11 over 12 patients, sensory NCSs were within normal limits. Only one patient showed abnormal sensory responses. The most common abnormal NCS findings were decreased amplitude with normal latency and normal conduction velocity. The needle analysis showed distal muscles including first dorsal interosseous, abductor policies brevis, tibialis anterior, medial gastrocnemius and peroneal longus muscles are more sensitive in detecting myotonic discharges than proximal muscles including deltoid, triceps, vastus medialis and vastus lateralis. Our findings showed sensory nerve responses were usually within normal limits. The most common NCS abnormality showed decreased motor nerve amplitudes. The needle test showed myotonic discharges were more prominent in the distal muscles in upper and lower limbs.
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.