ArticleNeurological research and practice2026
Diagnostic performance and safety of the edrophonium test in myasthenia gravis: a retrospective case-control study.
Article in Neurological research and practice, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disorder of the neuromuscular junction. The diagnosis typically relies on clinical features, serologic testing, and neurophysiological assessment but provocation tests such as the edrophonium test can provide rapid supportive information; however, data on its diagnostic performance are limited. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and safety of the edrophonium test in MG.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective case–control study of patients who underwent an edrophonium test at the Department of Neurology of the Medical University of Vienna between January 1991 and January 2024. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios and performed a multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify variables associated with a positive edrophonium test. Additionally, we assessed the safety of the edrophonium test.
resultsWe included 182 patients with MG (41.2% female; mean age 55.8 years) and 324 controls (55.2% female; mean age 53.6 years). The edrophonium test had a sensitivity of 83.5% and a specificity of 87.7% in diagnosing MG. Patients with a decrement after repetitive nerve stimulation had higher odds of a positive response to the edrophonium test (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.48–10.33, p = 0.0067), while odds were lower in patients with MuSK-MG compared to patients with AChR-MG (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01–0.82, p = 0.0254). Adverse events were reported in 58 patients (11.5%), in most of whom (53 patients, 91.4%) they were mild.
conclusionsWe provide data on the diagnostic performance and safety of the edrophonium test, supporting its use as an adjunctive diagnostic test for the diagnosis of MG.
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.