ArticleBeijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences2026
[Value of direct immunofluorescence in the diagnosis of oral mucosal pemphigus vulgaris: A retrospective study based on multi-index combined analysis].
Article in Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo clarify the diagnostic efficacy of various diagnostic methods through multi-index combined analysis, and to explore the core diagnostic value of direct immunofluorescence (DIF) in oral mucosal pemphigus vulgaris (PV).
methodsA total of 53 patients with confirmed oral mucosal PV were included, retrospectively. Their data of DIF, histopathology, serum enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and clinical diagnosis were systematically analyzed, and diagnostic efficacy of each method was evaluated using indicators, such as sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
resultsThe results showed that among the 53 patients, middle-aged and elderly females were predominant, the buccal mucosa was the most common involved site, and most patients had a history of blistering. The positive rate of DIF was 96.23%, mainly manifested as a reticular fluorescent deposition between epithelial spinous cells, demonstrating the highest diagnostic value with a sensitivity of 96.23%, specificity of 100.00%, and AUC of 0.981. Histopathology ranked second, with a sensitivity of 94.34%, a specificity of 100.00%, and an AUC value of 0.972. The ELISA test had a sensitivity of 82.61%, a specificity of 82.35%, and an AUC value of 0.825. Although the sensitivity of clinical diagnosis was acceptable, its specificity was relatively low. Additionally, DIF exhibited complementarity with histopathology, ELISA, and clinical diagnosis, and combined testing could improve diagnostic accuracy.
conclusionDIF is the "gold standard" for the diagnosis of oral mucosal PV. A comprehensive diagnostic workflow of "clinical manifestation-DIF-histopathology-ELISA" is proposed. This integrated diagnostic system not only significantly improves the accuracy of oral mucosal PV diagnosis but also aligns with the core principles of precision medicine, providing a basis for indivi-dualized treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41633587PMC12872360What 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.