眼肌型重症肌无力的自主和刺激性神经肌肉抖动研究的诊断准确性。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Muscle & Nerve Pub Date : 2024-07-13 DOI:10.1002/mus.28202
Giuseppe Cosentino, Paolo Prunetti, Giulia Tammam, Chiara Zaffina, Matteo Gastaldi, Cristina Tassorelli, Enrico Alfonsi, Massimiliano Todisco
{"title":"眼肌型重症肌无力的自主和刺激性神经肌肉抖动研究的诊断准确性。","authors":"Giuseppe Cosentino, Paolo Prunetti, Giulia Tammam, Chiara Zaffina, Matteo Gastaldi, Cristina Tassorelli, Enrico Alfonsi, Massimiliano Todisco","doi":"10.1002/mus.28202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction/aims: </strong>There is a lack of studies comparing the accuracy of neuromuscular jitter analysis during voluntary activation (v-jitter study) versus axonal stimulation (s-jitter study). The study aimed to compare these two techniques in the same population of patients with suspected ocular myasthenia gravis (OMG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fourteen control subjects (mean age: 55.5 ± 15.2 years) and 34 patients with suspected OMG (mean age: 59 ± 13.9 years) were prospectively evaluated. Twenty spike pairs and 30 individual spikes were analyzed during v-jitter and s-jitter study, respectively. Two different criteria for abnormal individual jitter values were evaluated: ≥ or > than 10% values exceeding the upper normal limit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OMG was diagnosed in 19 patients based on clinical and laboratory findings, without considering jitter measurements. In most patients, v-jitter and s-jitter analyses provided comparable results. The maximum sensitivity (89%) was achieved with s-jitter study using the ≥10% criterion, while the maximum specificity (93%) was found with v-jitter study using the >10% criterion.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Both v-jitter and s-jitter studies showed good to very good accuracy for the diagnosis of OMG, in the absence of any statistically significant difference. Therefore, the patient's cooperation level and examiner's experience should guide the choice of performing v-jitter or s-jitter analysis in patients with suspected OMG.</p>","PeriodicalId":18968,"journal":{"name":"Muscle & Nerve","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic accuracy of voluntary and stimulated neuromuscular jitter studies in ocular myasthenia gravis.\",\"authors\":\"Giuseppe Cosentino, Paolo Prunetti, Giulia Tammam, Chiara Zaffina, Matteo Gastaldi, Cristina Tassorelli, Enrico Alfonsi, Massimiliano Todisco\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mus.28202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction/aims: </strong>There is a lack of studies comparing the accuracy of neuromuscular jitter analysis during voluntary activation (v-jitter study) versus axonal stimulation (s-jitter study). The study aimed to compare these two techniques in the same population of patients with suspected ocular myasthenia gravis (OMG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fourteen control subjects (mean age: 55.5 ± 15.2 years) and 34 patients with suspected OMG (mean age: 59 ± 13.9 years) were prospectively evaluated. Twenty spike pairs and 30 individual spikes were analyzed during v-jitter and s-jitter study, respectively. Two different criteria for abnormal individual jitter values were evaluated: ≥ or > than 10% values exceeding the upper normal limit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OMG was diagnosed in 19 patients based on clinical and laboratory findings, without considering jitter measurements. In most patients, v-jitter and s-jitter analyses provided comparable results. The maximum sensitivity (89%) was achieved with s-jitter study using the ≥10% criterion, while the maximum specificity (93%) was found with v-jitter study using the >10% criterion.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Both v-jitter and s-jitter studies showed good to very good accuracy for the diagnosis of OMG, in the absence of any statistically significant difference. Therefore, the patient's cooperation level and examiner's experience should guide the choice of performing v-jitter or s-jitter analysis in patients with suspected OMG.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Muscle & Nerve\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Muscle & Nerve\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.28202\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Muscle & Nerve","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.28202","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言/目的:目前缺乏对自主激活时神经肌肉抖动分析(v-抖动研究)与轴突刺激时神经肌肉抖动分析(s-抖动研究)的准确性进行比较的研究。本研究的目的是在疑似眼肌型重症肌无力(OMG)患者的同一人群中比较这两种技术:对 14 名对照组受试者(平均年龄:55.5 ± 15.2 岁)和 34 名疑似 OMG 患者(平均年龄:59 ± 13.9 岁)进行了前瞻性评估。在 v 抖动和 s 抖动研究中分别分析了 20 对尖峰和 30 个单个尖峰。对单个抖动值异常的两种不同标准进行了评估:超出正常上限的值≥或>10%:结果:19 名患者根据临床和实验室检查结果被诊断为 OMG,而未考虑抖动测量值。在大多数患者中,v 抖动和 s 抖动分析的结果相当。使用≥10%的标准进行s-抖动研究可获得最高灵敏度(89%),而使用>10%的标准进行v-抖动研究可获得最高特异性(93%):讨论:v-抖动和 s-抖动研究对 OMG 诊断的准确性都很好,甚至非常好,没有任何统计学上的显著差异。因此,在对疑似 OMG 患者进行 v 型抖动或 s 型抖动分析时,应根据患者的合作程度和检查者的经验进行选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Diagnostic accuracy of voluntary and stimulated neuromuscular jitter studies in ocular myasthenia gravis.

Introduction/aims: There is a lack of studies comparing the accuracy of neuromuscular jitter analysis during voluntary activation (v-jitter study) versus axonal stimulation (s-jitter study). The study aimed to compare these two techniques in the same population of patients with suspected ocular myasthenia gravis (OMG).

Methods: Fourteen control subjects (mean age: 55.5 ± 15.2 years) and 34 patients with suspected OMG (mean age: 59 ± 13.9 years) were prospectively evaluated. Twenty spike pairs and 30 individual spikes were analyzed during v-jitter and s-jitter study, respectively. Two different criteria for abnormal individual jitter values were evaluated: ≥ or > than 10% values exceeding the upper normal limit.

Results: OMG was diagnosed in 19 patients based on clinical and laboratory findings, without considering jitter measurements. In most patients, v-jitter and s-jitter analyses provided comparable results. The maximum sensitivity (89%) was achieved with s-jitter study using the ≥10% criterion, while the maximum specificity (93%) was found with v-jitter study using the >10% criterion.

Discussion: Both v-jitter and s-jitter studies showed good to very good accuracy for the diagnosis of OMG, in the absence of any statistically significant difference. Therefore, the patient's cooperation level and examiner's experience should guide the choice of performing v-jitter or s-jitter analysis in patients with suspected OMG.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Muscle & Nerve
Muscle & Nerve 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
287
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Muscle & Nerve is an international and interdisciplinary publication of original contributions, in both health and disease, concerning studies of the muscle, the neuromuscular junction, the peripheral motor, sensory and autonomic neurons, and the central nervous system where the behavior of the peripheral nervous system is clarified. Appearing monthly, Muscle & Nerve publishes clinical studies and clinically relevant research reports in the fields of anatomy, biochemistry, cell biology, electrophysiology and electrodiagnosis, epidemiology, genetics, immunology, pathology, pharmacology, physiology, toxicology, and virology. The Journal welcomes articles and reports on basic clinical electrophysiology and electrodiagnosis. We expedite some papers dealing with timely topics to keep up with the fast-moving pace of science, based on the referees'' recommendation.
期刊最新文献
Lower limb nerve ultrasound: A four-way comparison of acquired and inherited axonopathy, inherited neuronopathy and healthy controls. Test-retest and inter-rater reliability of two devices measuring tactile mechanical detection thresholds in healthy adults: Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments and the cutaneous mechanical stimulator. Neuroma morphology: A macroscopic classification system. Access for ALL in ALS: A large-scale, inclusive, collaborative consortium to unlock the molecular and genetic mechanisms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The impact of genotype on age at loss of ambulation in individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy treated with corticosteroids: A single‐center study of 555 patients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1