MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2004006859 · doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2009.10.029

Guillain‐Barre syndrome presenting as epiglottitis in a child

2010· article· en· W2004006859 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Mélanie Duval, Sam J. Daniel

Notice bibliographique

RevueOtolaryngology · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Établissements canadiensMontreal Children's Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOtorhinolaryngologyMedicineLibrary scienceComputer scienceSurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A previously healthy five-year-old boy presented to the emergency department with respiratory distress and drooling. His medical history was unremarkable except for symptoms of an upper respiratory tract infection five days earlier. Upon arrival at the emergency room, the child was lethargic, leaning forward, and in severe distress. Stretch reflexes were absent in the upper and lower extremities. His temperature was normal. The child was immediately taken to the operating room for emergency intubation with a presumptive diagnosis of epiglottitis. Laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy revealed a large pool of secretions in the postcricoid area and pyriforms, bilateral vocal cord paralysis, and tracheobronchial aspiration. Postoperatively, an electromyography (EMG) showed no motor or sensory response in the upper and lower extremities. Concentric needle examination of the right tibialis anterior muscle revealed normal insertional activity, no motor unit potential, and no recruitment of motor unit. These findings were consistent with the diagnosis of severe Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) with some demyelination and possibly some axonal damage. Two days later, the child had progressed to flaccid quadriplegia and facial dysplegia, and he had lost all reflexes except for the preservation of a weak brachioradialis reflex. He was alert and would respond by blinking and moving his eyes. The child was treated with pantoprazole, gabapentin, diphenhydramine, and a five-day course of intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIg). A tracheostomy was performed after two weeks of intubation, and the child was hospitalized for six weeks. Three months after his discharge from the hospital, he was gaining strength, was decannulated, and went back to school part-time. One year later, he was walking normally and starting to run. This case report was approved by the Montreal Children's Hospital Institutional Review Board. GBS is an acute polyneuritis characterized by a rapidly progressing weakness and areflexia. It is the most common cause of acute-onset flaccid paralysis in children, with an incidence of 0.8 per 100,000 in children younger than 15 years.1 One third of childhood cases occur before the age of three years, and 73 percent of children suffering from GBS will initially present with weakness.2 Although onset of weakness is most frequently distal, 15 percent to 20 percent of children will initially present with proximal weakness. Cranial nerves are involved in approximately 45 percent of affected children, making it a more common occurrence than in adults.3 Maximal deficit will be reached within two weeks of onset of symptoms in about 80 percent of children and severity can vary from mild bilateral weakness to quadriplegia.3 Although GBS is a clinical diagnosis, it is characterized by elevated protein content in the cerebrospinal fluid without pleocytosis. However, this sign cannot be relied upon for diagnostic purposes because the elevation in protein content may be delayed for up to one week after onset of symptoms.3 Neurophysiological studies reveal slowing of nerve conduction attributable to demyelination, whereas EMG reveals loss of motor unit action potential.3 Although the mainstay of treatment is supportive, children with severe disease who cannot walk unaided can benefit from IVIg treatment to shorten recovery time. However, this treatment modality does not lessen the severity of the disease, and children who are quadriplegic and/or require mechanical ventilation do not seem to benefit from IVIg.4 Mechanical ventilation will be required in approximately 15 percent of patients suffering from GBS.5 Children with GBS tend to recover more rapidly and have more complete recovery than adults.3 More than 90 percent of children recover fully, and most children with incomplete recovery will have minimal residual deficits and will be able to walk unaided.4 Factors associated with poor prognosis include advanced age, fulminance, severity, presence of other significant illness, and primary axonopathy. The mortality rate of 1 percent to 2 percent in children suffering from GBS is attributable to respiratory failure and autonomic dysfunction.2 GBS is the most common cause of acute onset of paralysis in children. This diagnosis should be suspected in children with acute respiratory distress, vocal cord paralysis, and aspiration who also have associated neurological findings. Optimal management and supportive care in the acute stage are crucial, with severe cases requiring a tracheostomy and ventilatory support. Melanie Duval, participated in data collection and analysis, wrote manuscript, and approved final version; Sam J. Daniel, participated in design and interpretation of data, reviewed manuscript, and approved final version. Competing interests: Sam J. Daniel, speaker: Alcon, Abbott, Schering; research grant: Alcon. Sponsorships: None.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,059
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,249
Écart entre enseignants0,243 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOtolaryngologyMême sujetPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersTravaux en français237 207