ArticleMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Utilization of the Revised American College of Rheumatology (rACR) Scoring to Avoid Unnecessary Temporal Artery Biopsies-A Case Series.
Article in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, and more recently the revised ACR criteria (rACR), are a scoring system developed to aid in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis (GCA). Our aim was to investigate the value of the non-biopsy criteria of the original ACR criteria and rACR criteria to predict GCA, and investigate the utilization of such scores to avoid biopsy when a very high or very low likelihood of a positive temporal artery biopsy TAB was predicted. Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 59 patients undergoing TAB from 2013 to 2017 in Beaumont Hospital, a tertiary referral centre in Dublin, Ireland. Demographic data, biochemical results, presenting features, and histology results were collected and collated. Results: Data were analysed from 53 patients and ACR scores were compiled. Seventeen scored < 3 and thirty-six scored 3−5. All 11 positive biopsies were in the 3−5 score range. Forty-five patients were analysed with rACR scores. Eight were excluded due to not meeting the inclusion criteria. Of the 11 positive biopsies, 2 were in the 3−4 score range, and 9 were in the ≥5 score range. In the ACR method, 36% of all biopsies scored as low-risk pre-biopsy. In the rACR method, 84.4% of all biopsies scored in the low- and intermediate-risk group pre-biopsy and 15.6% of all biopsies scored in the high-risk group pre-biopsy. Conclusions: This study illustrates the potential value of the rACR scoring system as a useful tool to categorize patients according to risk with a view to avoiding unnecessary TAB. The data suggest that a TAB has a helpful role in low- and intermediate-risk groups but is of minimal benefit in the high-risk group.
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.