ArticleArchives of internal medicine research2026
Acute Management of Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Narrative Review.
Article in Archives of internal medicine research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rapidly progressive immune-mediated polyradiculoneuropathy that can cause respiratory failure, autonomic dysfunction, and significant long-term disability. This narrative review examines the acute management of GBS, including supportive care, established immunotherapies, and emerging treatment strategies. Early recognition and close monitoring of respiratory and autonomic function remain essential, particularly during the progressive phase of disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) and plasma exchange remain the primary disease-modifying treatments and have similar overall efficacy, although both primarily accelerate recovery rather than prevent ongoing nerve injury. Their limitations, including treatment-related fluctuations, adverse effects, cost, supply limitations, and the logistical challenges of plasma exchange, highlight the need for more effective therapies. Emerging treatments are increasingly targeting specific mechanisms involved in GBS pathophysiology. Although the C5 inhibitor eculizumab failed to improve outcomes in a phase 3 trial, early results with the upstream C1q inhibitor ANX005 suggest that earlier complement inhibition may reduce nerve injury and improve functional outcomes. Other investigational approaches include IgG-degrading enzymes such as imlifidase, FcRn inhibitors such as efgartigimod, regulatory T-cell therapies, and regenerative strategies. However, most of these treatments lack adequately powered randomized clinical trial data. Important gaps also remain in subtype-specific treatment, nerve regeneration, long-term rehabilitation, treatment-related fluctuations, and access to care. Future research should focus on more targeted and individualized therapies that address both immune-mediated injury and subsequent nerve damage.
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.