Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology (Jan 2021)

Comparison of five different electrophysiological criteria for childhood guillain barre syndrome

  • Ananthanarayanan Kasinathan,
  • Arushi G Saini,
  • Renu Suthar,
  • Lokesh Saini,
  • Jitendra K Sahu,
  • Pratibha Singhi,
  • Sunit Singhi,
  • Naveen Sankhyan

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/aian.AIAN_721_20
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 4
pp. 542 – 546

Abstract

Read online

Background: Internationally approved electrodiagnostic criteria for Guillain Barre syndrome lack in children. We intended to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the currently available five electrophysiological criteria for childhood Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) at the time of sentinel assessment. Methodology: In this single-center study, data of children diagnosed with GBS between January 2013 to December 2017 were retrieved. Patient charts were reviewed for clinical features, electrophysiological recordings. The electrodiagnostic results (4 motor nerves and two sensory nerves in upper limbs and lower limbs) were reanalyzed and were classified based on Dutch group; Ho; Hadden; Hughes and Rajabally criteria for GBS. Results: During this study period, of the 205 children with clinical features of GBS, 15 children had incomplete electrophysiological data, and four children were excluded due to missing data. The mean age of onset of the 186 children enrolled was 77 months; the median duration from symptom onset to electrodiagnostic evaluation was seven days; pure motor and motor-sensory form of GBS was seen in 71 and 115 children. Based on the Hadden criteria, a demyelinating pattern was noted in 57 children; axonal in 37; Inexcitable in 84 and Equivocal in 8 children. The sensitivity of the various criteria ranged from 71% to 100% for demyelination, 97% to 100% for axonal. The degree of agreement using Hadden and Rajabally criteria for Equivocal subtypes was 0.93. Conclusions: The Rajabally criteria showed the best sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy for electrodiagnosis of GBS in children when compared against Hadden criteria.

Keywords