Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38664341›Full record

ReviewActa neurologica Belgica2024

Differentiating recurrent Guillain-Barre syndrome and acute-onset chronic inflammatory polyneuropathy: literature review.

Berin Inan, Can Ebru Bekircan-Kurt, Mehmet Demirci, Sevim Erdem-Ozdamar, Ersin Tan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Acta neurologica Belgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Berin InanDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. berin.inan@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2758-0207
Can Ebru Bekircan-KurtDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2355-6979
Mehmet DemirciPrivate Neurology Practice, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7316-3877
Sevim Erdem-OzdamarDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9348-6457
Ersin TanDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8418-2961
Hacettepe University · TRSağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) is an acute-onset immune-mediated polyneuropathy characterized by ascending symmetrical muscle weakness, diminished reflexes, and sensory symptoms. While GBS typically follows a monophasic course, some patients experience treatment-related fluctuations or recurrences, posing diagnostic challenges in distinguishing GBS from acute-onset chronic inflammatory polyneuropathy (A-CIDP). A-CIDP, may present acutely, simulating GBS, with a nadir in less than 8 weeks, subsequently evolving into a chronic or relapsing course. The distinction between recurrent GBS and A-CIDP is crucial, as A-CIDP necessitates long-term immunosuppression. A PubMed search was conducted using the search terms 'recurrent Guillain Barre syndrome' and 'acute onset CIDP' focusing on studies in the English language, published between January 1, 2004 and April 30, 2023. Overlapping clinical features, particularly in the early stages, complicate differentiation between recurrent GBS and CIDP. Electrophysiological studies, ultrasonography, and immunological markers have been explored for discrimination; however, definitive criteria for differentiation remain elusive. Recent follow-up studies have further blurred the boundaries between recurrent GBS and A-CIDP, suggesting the persistence of underlying immune processes even in GBS patients without clinical deterioration. This emphasizes the necessity of reevaluating diagnostic criteria and treatment strategies. In conclusion, distinguishing recurrent GBS from A-CIDP remains an ongoing challenge. Existing evidence questions the categorization of recurrent GBS as a distinct entity, challenging its very existence. Continued research is necessary to refine diagnostic criteria and deepen our understanding of these conditions, ultimately advancing patient care. This review delves into the intricacies of recurrent GBS and A-CIDP differentiation and highlights the need for a reevaluation of the recurrent GBS concept.

Indexed as

Guillain-Barre SyndromePolyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory DemyelinatingRecurrenceDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansAcute-onset chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathyInflammatory polyneuropathyRecurrent Guillain–Barre syndromeTreatment-related fluctuations

Identifiers

PMID38664341
OpenAlexW4395450575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.