Observational studyMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2018
Temporal headache and jaw claudication may be the key for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis.
Observational study in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- OMERACT GCA phantom project: validation of a 3D-printed ultrasound training phantom for diagnosis of giant cell arteritis.RMD open · 2025Article
- Neuro-ophthalmic Manifestations of Giant Cell Arteritis: A Review.Journal of ophthalmic & vision research · 2025Review
- Diagnostic Dilemmas in Giant Cell Arteritis: Overcoming Anchoring Bias.Case reports in rheumatology · 2025Article
- Cardiology-Rheumatology Intersections in Aortitis and Aortic Aneurysms: Focus on Early Recognition and Management.JACC. Case reports · 2024Article
- Giant Cell Arteritis: A Case-Based Narrative Review of the Literature.Current pain and headache reports · 2022Review
- Etiology, Diagnosis and Management of Aortitis.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2020Review
- A Comprehensive Review of the Treatment and Management of Myofascial Pain Syndrome.Current pain and headache reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTemporal artery biopsy (TAB) is a surgical procedure with a low positive yield. The purpose of this study is to determine which variables are the most important in the giant cell arteritis (GCA) diagnosis. The objective of this evaluation is to improve the percentage of positive temporal artery biopsy and if possible, avoid the biopsy in some cases. MATERIAL AND
methodsA retrospective clinical study consisted of 90 patients who had undergone TAB at the Río Hortega Hospital (Spain) from January 2009 to December 2016. Clinical findings, erythrocyte sedimentation rates (ESR) and other laboratory parameters, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for GCA score and biopsy results were recorded.
resultsNineteen (21.1%) biopsies were positive for GCA. The mean age in positive TAB was 78.6 years old (SD 7.93), and 73.7% were female. Presence of temporal headache (p = 0.003), jaw claudication (p = 0.001), abnormal artery exploration (p = 0.023), elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (p = 0.035), CRP (p = 0.018) and platelets (p = 0.042), were significantly associated with GCA. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that the best predictors for the diagnosis of GCA are headache and jaw claudication, adjusted by sex, age, and temporal exploration.
conclusionsTAB has benefit only for patients who score a 2 or 3 on the ACR criteria for GCA without biopsy. These findings highlight the need for a better diagnostic strategy for patients with suspected temporal arteritis.
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.