Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42590009›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026

The Role of Muscle Biopsy in the Era of Modern Genomic Medicine-A Review.

Menachem Sadeh, Ron Dabby

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Menachem SadehDepartment of Neurology, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon 5822012, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-7408-4652
Ron DabbyDepartment of Neurology, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon 5822012, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review examines the evolving role of muscle biopsy in the diagnosis of neuromuscular disorders in the era of modern genomic medicine. Historically the cornerstone of myopathy diagnosis, muscle biopsy enabled structural, histochemical, and ultrastructural characterization of muscle diseases. However, the introduction of next-generation sequencing and other genomic technologies has shifted the diagnostic paradigm, with genetic testing now serving as the preferred first-line approach for many hereditary myopathies due to its non-invasive nature and high diagnostic yield. However, muscle biopsy remains indispensable in the evaluation of inflammatory, toxic, metabolic, mitochondrial, and certain rare acquired myopathies. Biopsy is also valuable when genetic testing is inconclusive, particularly for interpreting variants of uncertain significance, through histopathological, immunohistochemical, and biochemical analyses. In certain disorders, diagnosis may rely primarily on biopsy findings. Emerging technologies, including RNA sequencing, transcriptomics, proteomics, spatial transcriptomics, and artificial intelligence-assisted pathology, are expanding the diagnostic value of muscle tissue beyond traditional morphological assessment. Rather than being replaced by genomic medicine, muscle biopsy is evolving into a complementary component of an integrated diagnostic strategy that combines clinical, pathological, and molecular data to improve diagnostic accuracy and guide precision medicine in neuromuscular disorders.

Indexed as

immunohistochemistryinflammatory myopathiesmuscle biopsyneuromuscular disordersnext-generation sequencingvariants of uncertain significance (VUS)

Identifiers

PMID42590009
PMCPMC13467138

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.