ArticleMediterranean journal of rheumatology2024
Aetiology of Vascular Purpura in a Single Centre Experience: Contribution of Clinical and Paraclinical Data.
Article in Mediterranean journal of rheumatology, 2024. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vascular purpura can be the clinical expression of infectious, inflammatory, drug-related, neoplastic, and endocrine pathologies. To date, there is no consensus codifying the investigation of vascular purpura, especially when it is isolated. Patients and methods: We proposed to study through a retrospective study of 73 cases of vascular purpura, occurring during the period 2004-2019 in our internal medicine department, the contribution of various clinical and paraclinical data to the aetiological diagnosis of vascular purpura. Data were considered to be contributory only when they constituted a solid argument in favour of the aetiological diagnosis of vascular purpura. Results: Our series involved 73 patients including 41 women and 32 men (Gender ratio: 0.78). Mean age was 49 ± 17 years [16-80]. Vascular purpura was isolated in 3% of cases. For the remaining patients, it was associated with functional (91%) or physical (48%) manifestations. It was associated with other skin lesions in 45% of cases. The accepted aetiologies were primary vasculitis (26%), drug-related (15%), infectious (11%) and secondary to connectivitis (10%). No cause was found in a third of cases. Clinical data alone made it possible to suggest the aetiology in more than half of cases. Special investigations were contributory in 46% of cases. The course was contributory in 18% of patients for drug-related and paraneoplastic causes. Conclusion: vascular purpura's diverse clinical presentation presents diagnostic challenges. Aetiologies include vasculitis, drug reactions, infections, and connective tissue disorders. Comprehensive clinical assessment is essential.
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.