Observational studyRMD open2022
Influence of the EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in large vessel vasculitis in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: results of the ARTESER register.
Observational study in RMD open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging-guided stratification in giant cell arteritis: prognostic and therapeutic implications.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Review
- Mortality in patients with giant cell arteritis in Spain: results from the ARTESER registry.Arthritis research & therapy · 2025Article
- 18F-FDG-PET/CT Scan for Detection of Large Vessel Involvement in Giant Cell Arteritis: Arteser Spanish Registry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Incidence and clinical manifestations of giant cell arteritis in Spain: results of the ARTESER register.RMD open · 2024Article
- Observational
- Giant cell temporal arteritis: a clinicopathological study with emphasis on unnecessary biopsy.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
20 authors at 18 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe main study objective was to determine how giant cell arteritis (GCA) is diagnosed in our clinical practice and whether the EULAR recommendations have influenced the diagnostic procedures used.
methodsARTEritis of the Rheumatology Spanish Society -Sociedad Española de Reumatología (ARTESER) is a multicentre observational retrospective study conducted in 26 hospitals with support from the Spanish Society of Rheumatology. All patients diagnosed with GCA between 1 June 2013 and 29 March 2019 were included. The gold standard for the diagnosis of GCA was the judgement of the physician in charge, according to clinical criteria, supported by data available from laboratory tests, imaging studies (ultrasound, positron emission tomography (PET) and MRI/CT angiography) and temporal artery biopsy (TAB) when available.
resultsWe included 1675 patients with GCA (mean age±SD (76.9±8.1) years, 1178 women (70.3%)). Of these, 776 patients had a positive TAB (46.3%), 503 (30.0%) positive ultrasound, 245 positive PET (14.6%) and 64 positive MRI/CT angiography (3.8%). These percentages changed substantially over the study. From 2013 to 2019, the use of ultrasound in diagnosis grew from 25.8% to 52.9% and PET from 12.3% to 19.6%, while use of TAB decreased from 50.3% to 33.3%.
conclusionsBiopsy was the most widely used diagnostic test for confirming GCA, but use of imaging as a diagnostic tool has grown in recent years. Following publication of the 2018 EULAR recommendations, ultrasound has displaced biopsy as the first-line diagnostic test; TAB was performed in a third and PET in a fifth of cases.
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.