ReviewFrontiers in medicine2024
Temporal artery biopsy in giant cell arteritis: clinical perspectives and histological patterns.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of an acute care surgery service performing temporal artery biopsy for suspected giant cell arteritis.Surgery open science · 2026Article
- Large vessel vasculitis reframed: integrating conceptual shifts and evidence into practice for Takayasu arteritis and giant cell arteritis.Journal of rheumatic diseases · 2026Review
- Challenges and Future Trends in Large Vessel Vasculitis.Circulation · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Challenges and Modern Therapeutic Strategies in Giant Cell Arteritis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Case of Giant Cell Arteritis Presenting With a Hyperechoic Wall Thickening on Temporal Artery Ultrasonography.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although its role has been debated, temporal artery biopsy (TAB) remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of cranial giant cell arteritis (GCA). The specificity of TAB is excellent and the sensitivity, albeit lower, is comparable with other diagnostic modalities used for the diagnosis of GCA. This outpatient procedure has a low rate of complications and is well integrated in the majority of healthcare systems. The length of the specimen, the number of the examined sections and the prolonged use of glucocorticoids before the biopsy may affect the outcome of the TAB as diagnostic tool. The typical histological findings in GCA are often characterized by granulomatous inflammation with infiltration of mononuclear cells with or without the presence of giant cell, varying degrees of external and internal elastic lamina damage and intimal thickening. Overlooking signs of inflammation in the adventitia and in connective tissue surrounding the temporal artery may lead to false negative results. The distinction between healed arteritis and age-related atherosclerosis may be challenging.
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.