Tag: objective diagnostic tests

Handgrip strength in children, adolescents, and young adults with suspected myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Background: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) in children, young people (CYP) lacks validated diagnostic biomarkers. Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is central to case definitions and is usually assessed by patient report. We evaluated the feasibility and clinical value of handgrip strength (HGS) testing in PEM-reporting CYP referred for suspected ME/CFS.

Methods: In this prospective observational study at the Munich Chronic Fatigue Center for Young People (November 2022-November 2024), 147 patients (10-25 years) referred for the assessment of ME/CFS with positive DSQ-PEM screening and 83 healthy controls (HC) completed two HGS sessions (10 maximal grips/session; 3-s contraction/5-s rest; 60-minute inter-session break) using a digital dynamometer. We derived maximal force (Fmax), mean force (Fmean), fatigue ratio (FR = Fmax/Fmean), and recovery ratio (RR = Fmean session 2 / session 1). Analyses used repeated-measures ANCOVA, linear regression, partial Spearman correlations (adjusted for sex, age, and BMI), and proportional odds models for group membership (HC, noME/CFS, ME/CFS), reporting accuracy, and the C-statistic. Sensitivity analyses compared noME/CFS with confirmed CCC-ME/CFS.

Results: After clinical work-up, 84/147 (57%) patients were classified as ME/CFS (confirmed or probable) and 63/147 (43%) as noME/CFS. HGS test completion rate was high (session 1: 146/147, 99.3%; session 2: 142/147, 96.6%). Compared with HC, patients had substantially lower HGS (mean difference -9.93 kg, 95% CI: -12.00 to -7.85), and HGS indices correlated modestly with physical functioning (SF-12 PCS), but not with PEM duration. Both noME/CFS and ME/CFS groups differed from HC in absolute strength indices (Fmean, Fmax) and FR. RR differed between ME/CFS and HC, whereas no HGS index significantly separated noME/CFS from ME/CFS. In proportional odds models, each HGS index improved fit (all p < 0.001), but discrimination across HC, noME/CFS, and ME/CFS patients was moderate (accuracy 49.2-57.3% vs no-information rate 36.5%, with best performance for Fmean in session 2). In the CCC-restricted sensitivity analysis, discrimination between confirmed CCC-ME/CFS and noME/CFS was moderate (accuracy 62.8-70.7%; C-statistic 0.63-0.73), with best performance for absolute strength indices and RR.

Conclusions: Standardized two-session repeated HGS testing is feasible in CYP with chronic fatigue and self-reported PEM and provides an objective marker of functional impairment that aligns with physical health status but not with PEM duration. However, HGS alone shows limited ability to discriminate ME/CFS from other fatiguing noME/CFS conditions. HGS may be useful for quantitative phenotyping, patient stratification, and longitudinal outcome assessment rather than as a standalone diagnostic biomarker.

Source: Mihatsch L, Schartner L, de Luna JL, Höhler C, Bucka L, Lovrenovic L, Eidenschink S, Schmuck B, Bienemann V, Christa C, Mittelstraß K, Hausruckinger A, Warlitz C, Michel K, Gerrer K, Freitag H, Scheibenbogen C, Pricoco R, Behrends U. Handgrip strength in children, adolescents, and young adults with suspected myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. J Transl Med. 2026 Jul 15. doi: 10.1186/s12967-026-08654-5. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 42458481. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12967-026-08654-5 (Full text available as PDF file)

The role of clinical neurophysiology in the definition and assessment of fatigue and fatigability

Highlights:

  • Though a common symptom, fatigue is difficult to define and investigate, and occurs in a wide variety of disorders, with differing pathological causes.
  • This review aims to guide clinicians in how to approach fatigue and to suggest that neurophysiological tests may allow an understanding of its origin and severity.
  • The effectiveness of neurophysiological tests as cost-effective objective biomarkers for the assessment of fatigue has been summarised.

Abstract

Though a common symptom, fatigue is difficult to define and investigate, occurs in a wide variety of neurological and systemic disorders, with differing pathological causes. It is also often accompanied by a psychological component. As a symptom of long-term COVID-19 it has gained more attention.

In this review, we begin by differentiating fatigue, a perception, from fatigability, quantifiable through biomarkers. Central and peripheral nervous system and muscle disorders associated with these are summarised. We provide a comprehensive and objective framework to help identify potential causes of fatigue and fatigability in a given disease condition. It also considers the effectiveness of neurophysiological tests as objective biomarkers for its assessment. Among these, twitch interpolation, motor cortex stimulation, electroencephalography and magnetencephalography, and readiness potentials will be described for the assessment of central fatigability, and surface and needle electromyography (EMG), single fibre EMG and nerve conduction studies for the assessment of peripheral fatigability.

The purpose of this review is to guide clinicians in how to approach fatigue, and fatigability, and to suggest that neurophysiological tests may allow an understanding of their origin and interactions. In this way, their differing types and origins, and hence their possible differing treatments, may also be defined more clearly.

Source: Tankisi H, Versace V, Kuppuswamy A, Cole J. The role of clinical neurophysiology in the definition and assessment of fatigue and fatigability. Clin Neurophysiol Pract. 2023 Dec 18;9:39-50. doi: 10.1016/j.cnp.2023.12.004. PMID: 38274859; PMCID: PMC10808861. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2467981X23000367 (Full text)

Accurate diagnosis of myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome based upon objective test methods for characteristic symptoms

Abstract:

Although myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) are considered to be synonymous, the definitional criteria for ME and CFS define two distinct, partially overlapping, clinical entities. ME, whether defined by the original criteria or by the recently proposed criteria, is not equivalent to CFS, let alone a severe variant of incapacitating chronic fatigue.

Distinctive features of ME are: muscle weakness and easy muscle fatigability, cognitive impairment, circulatory deficits, a marked variability of the symptoms in presence and severity, but above all, post-exertional “malaise”: a (delayed) prolonged aggravation of symptoms after a minor exertion. In contrast, CFS is primarily defined by (unexplained) chronic fatigue, which should be accompanied by four out of a list of 8 symptoms, e.g., headaches.

Due to the subjective nature of several symptoms of ME and CFS, researchers and clinicians have questioned the physiological origin of these symptoms and qualified ME and CFS as functional somatic syndromes. However, various characteristic symptoms, e.g., post-exertional “malaise” and muscle weakness, can be assessed objectively using well-accepted methods, e.g., cardiopulmonary exercise tests and cognitive tests. The objective measures acquired by these methods should be used to accurately diagnose patients, to evaluate the severity and impact of the illness objectively and to assess the positive and negative effects of proposed therapies impartially.

 

Source: Twisk FN. Accurate diagnosis of myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome based upon objective test methods for characteristic symptoms. World J Methodol. 2015 Jun 26;5(2):68-87. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v5.i2.68. ECollection 2015. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4482824/ (Full article)