Pathophysiology and management of critical illness polyneuropathy and myopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical illness-associated weakness (CIAW) is an umbrella term used to describe a group of neuromuscular disorders caused by severe illness. It can be subdivided into three major classifications based on the component of the neuromuscular system (i.e. peripheral nerves or skeletal muscle or both) that are affected. This includes critical illness polyneuropathy (CIP), critical illness myopathy (CIM), and an overlap syndrome, critical illness polyneuromyopathy (CIPNM). It is a common complication observed in people with critical illness requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Given CIAW is found in individuals experiencing grave illness, it can be challenging to study from a practical standpoint. However, over the past 2 decades, many insights into the pathophysiology of this condition have been made. Results from studies in both humans and animal models have found that a profound systemic inflammatory response and factors related to bioenergetic failure as well as microvascular, metabolic, and electrophysiological alterations underlie the development of CIAW. Current management strategies focus on early mobilization, achieving euglycemia, and nutritional optimization. Other interventions lack sufficient evidence, mainly due to a dearth of large trials. The goal of this Physiology in Medicine article is to highlight important aspects of the pathophysiology of these enigmatic conditions. It is hoped that improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying these disorders will lead to further study and new investigations for novel pharmacologic, nutritional, and exercise-based interventions to optimize patient outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".