ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2019
Diagnostic Performance of a Temporal Artery Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Giant Cell Arteritis in Japan-A Single-center Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Symptoms, Physical Signs, and Laboratory Tests for Giant Cell Arteritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Temporal artery biopsy in giant cell arteritis: clinical perspectives and histological patterns.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of a temporal artery biopsy (TAB) in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis (GCA) in a single-center retrospective cohort in Japan. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed on consecutive patients who visited our hospital between April 2009 and October 2018 and underwent a TAB. The sensitivity and specificity were calculated for the three pathological standards for a TAB, predetermined according to the pathological criterion of the 1990 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria: A) vasculitis characterized by predominant mononuclear cell infiltration; B) vasculitis with granulomatous inflammation; and C) vasculitis with multinucleated giant cells. We also analyzed the clinical parameters predicting the diagnosis of GCA and the impact of a diagnostic delay of ≥3 months on cardiovascular complications of GCA. Results Our study population was 16 cases in the GCA group and 13 in the non-GCA group. The sensitivity and specificity for Standard A of a TAB were 81% and 85%, respectively, while those for stricter Standards B or C were identical, at 75% and 100%, respectively. These pathological standards, but not any other parameters, significantly predicted the diagnosis. A diagnostic delay tended to cause cardiovascular complications (p=0.057). Conclusion The sensitivity and specificity of the pathological standards of a TAB were favorable in our cohort and were the only predictors for the diagnosis of GCA. Considering the possible impact of a diagnostic delay on cardiovascular complications, the early recognition and prompt initiation of glucocorticoid therapy is needed, even in Japan, where GCA is uncommon.
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.