ArticleNeurocritical care2022
Risk Factors for Mechanical Ventilation in Patients with Guillain-Barré Syndrome.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of the Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio in Guillain Barré Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Mediators of inflammation · 2022Pooled it
- Predictors of respiratory decline in neuromuscular disorders.Respiratory medicine · 2026Review
- Predictors of respiratory failure in Guillain-Barré syndrome: a 22 year cohort study from a single Italian centre.European journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Predicting of Mechanical Ventilation and Outcomes by Using Models and Biomarker in Guillain-Barré Syndrome.Neurology and therapy · 2023Article
- An Analysis of Respiratory Muscle Paralysis of Adult Patients in Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Retrospective Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRespiratory support is required in 20-30% of patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). We investigated clinical and biological risk factors for mechanical ventilation (MV) in northeast China through a retrospective GBS study. The Erasmus GBS Respiratory Insufficiency Score (EGRIS) is a prognostic model for MV in patients with GBS, and its usefulness has been validated in several countries but not in China. Therefore, we intended to validate the EGRIS model in our GBS cohort.
methodsA total of 252 patients with GBS were included in this study from January 2013 to October 2017. Risk factors for MV were identified via multivariate logistic regression analysis. The prognostic value of the EGRIS was validated via receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.
resultsThirty-one patients (12.3%) required MV (mean age 54.19 years), with a majority being male (77.4%). The risk factors for MV were male sex [odds ratio (OR) 3.720, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.155-11.985, p < 0.05], shorter interval from onset to admission (OR 0.830, 95% CI 0.711-0.970, p < 0.05), lower Medical Research Council sum score at admission (OR 0.942, 95% CI 0.911-0.973, p < 0.001), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio at admission (OR 1.174, 95% CI 1.049-1.315, p < 0.01), and cranial nerve deficit (OR 3.805, 95% CI 1.373-10.541, p < 0.05). The EGRIS had a good predictive ability for MV (area under the receiver operating curve 0.861) in patients with GBS, and a high EGRIS was a predictor for MV (OR 8.778, 95% CI 3.432-22.448, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in ganglioside administration between ventilated and nonventilated patients.
conclusionsAn elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio at admission and a high EGRIS could serve as predictors for MV in our GBS cohort.
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.