Mononeuritis multiplex: an unexpectedly frequent feature of severe COVID-19

  1. Edward Needham
  2. Virginia Newcombe
  3. Andrew Michell
  4. Rachel Thornton
  5. Andrew Grainger
  6. Fahim Anwar
  7. Elizabeth Warburton
  8. David Menon
  9. Monica Trivedi
  10. Stephen Sawcer

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The prolonged mechanical ventilation that is often required by patients with severe COVID-19 is expected to result in significant intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICUAW) in many of the survivors. However, in our post-COVID-19 follow-up clinic we have found that, as well as the anticipated global weakness related to loss of muscle mass, a significant proportion of these patients also have disabling focal neurological deficits relating to multiple axonal mononeuropathies. Amongst the 69 patients with severe COVID-19 that have been discharged from the intensive care units in our hospital, we have seen 11 individuals (16%) with such a mononeuritis multiplex. In many instances, the multi-focal nature of the weakness in these patients was initially unrecognised as symptoms were wrongly assumed to relate simply to “critical illness neuromyopathy”. While mononeuropathy is well recognised as an occasional complication of intensive care, our experience suggests that such deficits are surprisingly frequent and often disabling in patients recovering from severe COVID-19.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1007/s00415-020-10321-8
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.19.20149898: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.19.20149898: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.19.20149898v2 on medRxiv
  5. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.19.20149898: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent to participate: Not applicable (this is not an interventional study) Consent for publication: All patients gave fully informed written consent Availability of data and material: All available data are included in the paper Code availability: Not applicable Authors' contributions: All authors contributes to the clinical care of the patients described and all provided substantive input to the design, drafting and editing of the manuscript Acknowledgements: The authors thank Jon Curtis for his help in designing and constructing the figure.Randomizationnot detected.Blindingnot detected.Power Analysisnot detected.Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Data from additional tools added to each annotation on a weekly basis.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  6. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.19.20149898v1 on medRxiv