ReviewZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2009
[Dermatomyositis].
Review in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Severe dysphagia and erythrodermia in a 59-year-old man].Der Internist · 2013Article
- [Is bioptic assurance reasonable in patients with Sjögren's syndrome? From focus score to diagnosing vasculitides].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dermatomyositis (DM) is a systemic inflammatory disease involving skin, muscles and other organs. Immunologically mediated inflammation of small vessels leads to vascular damage, especially of the muscular tissue. Typically DM presents clinically with DM-type local or generalized rash and proximal muscular weakness. Laboratory signs of muscular damage (elevated serum CK, myoglobinuria) may be initially absent. Magnetic resonance tomography frequently shows edema of the involved muscles, while electromyography shows a myopathic pattern with spontaneous activity. Muscle biopsy from involved muscle with histological, immunohistological, histochemical and possibly electron-microscopic examination confirms the diagnosis of inflammatory muscle disease and furthermore of DM-specific muscular findings. Typical findings include the deposition of 5b-9 complement components (membrane attack complex) at the capillaries, perifascicular inflammatory infiltrates composed predominantly of CD4+ T-lymphocytes, B-lymphocytes and plasmacytoid dendritic cells, endothelial swelling and damage, loss of capillaries with perifascicular atrophy and tubuloreticular endothelial inclusions on electron-microscopic examination. Detection of myositis-specific autoantibodies is especially helpful in the diagnosis of early and atypical cases with features of overlapping disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.