This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with anti-MuSK MG, rituximab increased the probability of a favorable outcome.

Introduction: A randomized trial demonstrated benefit from thymectomy in nonthymomatous acetylcholine receptor (AChR)‐antibody positive myasthenia gravis (MG). Uncontrolled observational and histologic studies suggest thymectomy may not be efficacious in anti–muscle‐specific kinase (MuSK)‐MG. Methods: The therapeutic impact of thymectomy was evaluated from data collected for a multicenter, retrospective blinded review of rituximab in MuSK‐MG. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between thymectomy (n = 26) and nonthymectomy (n = 29) groups, including treatment with rituximab (42% vs. 45%). At last visit, 35% of thymectomy subjects reached the primary endpoint, a Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) post‐intervention status (PIS) score of minimal manifestations (MM) or better, compared with 55% of controls (P = 0.17). After controlling for age at onset of MG, rituximab, prednisone, and intravenous immunoglobulin/plasma exchange treatment, thymectomy was not associated with greater likelihood of favorable clinical outcome (odds ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.12–1.53, P = 0.19). Discussion: Thymectomy was not associated with additional clinical improvement in this multicenter cohort of MuSK‐MG patients. Muscle Nerve 59:404–410, 2019

Brief Reports should be submitted online to www.editorialmanager.com/ amsurg. (See details online under ''Instructions for Authors''.) They should be no more than 4 double-spaced pages with no Abstract or sub-headings, with a maximum of four (4) references. If figures are included, they should be limited to two (2). The cost of printing color figures is the responsibility of the author.In general, authors of case reports should use the Brief Report format.

Introduction/Aims: It is unknown if patients with neuromuscular diseases prefer inperson or virtual telemedicine visits. We studied patient opinions and preference on virtual versus in-person visits, and the factors influencing such preferences.Methods: Telephone surveys, consisting of 11 questions, of patients from 10 neuromuscular centers were completed.Results: Five hundred and twenty surveys were completed. Twenty-six percent of respondents preferred virtual visits, while 50% preferred in-person visits. Sixty-four percent reported physical interaction as "very important." For receiving a new diagnosis, 55% preferred in-person vs 35% reporting no preference. Forty percent were concerned about a lack of physical examination vs 20% who were concerned about