One of the most common referrals to the electrodiagnostic (EDX) laboratory is to confirm a clinical impression of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The EDX studies are valuable in localizing median nerve abnormalities to the wrist, grading its severity, and excluding other condition that can mimic or coexist with CTS. However, there are many clinical and EDX pitfalls that can lead to misdiagnosis. Careful clinical assessment and attention to technical factors and details of the EDX techniques are fundamental for the quality and accurate interpretation of the study. This review aims to discuss the clinical and the EDX approaches to the diagnosis of CTS with emphasis on the commonly encountered pitfalls.

Background A recent randomized trial of patients with primarily anterior circulation intracranial artery stenosis showed that intensive medical therapy was superior to intracranial stenting in preventing recurrent stroke. The rate of stroke recurrence or death in symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis with medical therapy alone may be especially high, and rates compared with endovascular therapy need further study. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the rates of stroke recurrence or death (the primary outcome) in symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis with medical or endovascular treatment over a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. We included all studies in any language indexed in MEDLINE or EMBASE, supplemented by bibliography searches and by contacting the authors. The secondary endpoints were stroke recurrence, and basilar artery and vertebral artery stroke recurrence rates. Results 23 studies (592 medical treatment patients and 480 endovascular treatment patients) were included. The risk of combined stroke recurrence or death was 14.8 per 100 person-years (95% CI 9.5 to 20.1) in the medical group compared with 8.9 per 100 person-years (95% CI 6.9 to 11.0) in the endovascular group. The incidence rate ratio was 1.3 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.7). The stroke recurrence rate was 9.6 per 100 person-years (95% CI 5.1 to 14.1) in the medical group compared with 7.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 5.5 to 9.0) in the endovascular group. Conclusions Our results showed that the risk of stroke recurrence or death or the risk of stroke recurrence alone was comparable between the medical and endovascular therapy groups. A small preventive effect of endovascular therapy may exist, particularly if the 30 day postprocedural risk is reduced.

Background: Guillain–Barre syndrome (GBS) is an inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathy characterized by rapidly evolving weakness and areflexia, reaching nadir within 4 weeks. Data on the characteristic of GBS in Saudi Arabia are limited. This study aimed to describe the clinical, electrophysiological, and laboratory characteristics and outcome of a multicenter cohort of patients with GBS. Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter nationwide study. Patients who had GBS, identified through Brighton Criteria, between January 2015 and December 2019 were included. Data collected included demographics, clinical features, cerebrospinal fluid profile, reported electrophysiological patterns, treatment, and outcome. Reported GBS subtypes were compared using chi-square, Fisher's exact, or Mann–Whitney U tests, as appropriate. Results: A total of 156 patients with GBS were included (men, 61.5%), with a median age of 38 (interquartile range, 26.25–53.5) years. The most commonly reported antecedent illnesses were upper respiratory tract infection (39.1%) and diarrhea (27.8%). All but two patients (98.7%) had weakness, 64.1% had sensory symptoms, 43.1% had facial diplegia, 33.8% had oropharyngeal weakness, 12.4% had ophthalmoplegia, and 26.3% needed mechanical ventilation. Cytoalbuminological dissociation was observed in 69.1% of the patients. GBS-specific therapy was administered in 96.8% of the patients, of whom 88.1% had intravenous immunoglobulin, and 11.9% had plasmapheresis. Approximately half of the patients were able to walk independently within 9 months after discharge, and a third regained the ability to walk independently thereafter. Death of one patient was caused by septicemia. Acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy was the most commonly reported GBS subtype (37.7%), followed by acute motor axonal neuropathy (29.5%), and acute motor-sensory axonal neuropathy (19.2%). Conclusion: The clinical and laboratory characteristics and outcome of GBS in the Arab population of Saudi Arabia are similar to the international cohorts. The overall prognosis is favorable.

Little is known of how accurately a first-time seizure witness can provide reliable details of a semiology. Our goal was to determine how accurately first-time seizure witnesses could identify key elements of an epileptic event that would aid the clinician in diagnosing a seizure. A total of 172 participants over 17 years of age, with a mean (sd) of 33.12 (13.2) years and 49.4% female, composed of two groups of community dwelling volunteers, were shown two different seizure videos; one with a focal seizure that generalized (GSV), and the other with a partial seizure that did not generalize (PSV). Participants were first asked about what they thought was the event that had occurred. They then went through a history-taking scenario by an assessor using a battery of pre-determined questions about involvement of major regions: the head, eyes, mouth, upper limbs, lower limbs, or change in consciousness. Further details were then sought about direction of movement in the eyes, upper and lower limbs, the side of limb movements and the type of movements in the upper and lower limbs. Analysis was with descriptive statistics and logistic regression. One hundred twenty-two (71.4%) identified the events as seizure or epilepsy. The accuracy of identifying major areas of involvement ranged from 60 to 89.5%. Horizontal head movements were significantly more recognized in the PSV, while involvement of the eyes, lateralization of arm movement, type of left arm movement, leg involvement, and lateralization of leg movement were significantly more recognized in the GSV. Those shown the GSV were more likely to recognize the event as "seizure" or "epilepsy" than those shown the PSV; 78 (84.8%) vs 44 (55.7%), (OR 0.22, p < 0.0001). Younger age was also associated with correct recognition (OR 0.96, P 0.049). False positive responses ranged from 2.5 to 32.5%. First-time witnesses can identify important elements more than by chance alone, and are more likely to associate generalized semiologies with seizures or epilepsy than partial semiologies. However, clinicians still need to navigate the witness’s account carefully for additional information since routine questioning could result in a misleading false positive answer.