ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2025
New index for distinguishing between critical illness myopathy and neuromyopathy: CMAP amplitude/duration index.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Critical illness-associated weakness is a common neuromuscular syndrome that may manifest as critical illness myopathy (CIM), critical illness polyneuropathy (CIP), or an overlapping syndrome known as critical illness polyneuromyopathy (CIPM). Distinguishing between these subtypes can be challenging due to technical issues, patient-related factors such as insufficient cooperation with needle electromyography (EMG) or edema, and the need for sophisticated, time-consuming electrophysiological methods and invasive procedures such as biopsy. This study aimed to contribute to the electrophysiological distinction between CIM and CIPM. Materials and methods: A new index was designed based on distal compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude and negative peak duration values. Comparative and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed on the parameters of patients with CIM and CIPM, as well as between patient groups and controls. Results: The median and ulnar CMAP index cut-off values for distinguishing between CIM and CIPM were determined to be 0.35 and 0.51, respectively. Values below these cut-off points support a diagnosis of CIPM while higher values indicate CIM. The best parameter for distinguishing both CIM and CIPM patients from healthy controls was the peroneal CMAP index, with a cut-off value of 0.45. Conclusion: The CMAP index can be easily calculated from CMAP values obtained during routine nerve conduction studies. This index may serve as a practical and guiding method for differentiating between CIM and CIPM, contributing to the electrophysiological diagnosis of critically ill patients, and particularly those with unreliable sensory nerve action potentials and needle EMG examinations.
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.