以多普勒超声为金标准验证新版RA缓解定义

原文

译文

[2011] [THU0307] VALIDATION OF THE NEW ACR/EULAR REMISSION CRITERIA IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS USING POWER DOPPLER ULTRASONOGRAPHY AS A GOLD STANDARD

A. Balsa, E. de Miguel, L. Lojo, C. Castillo, D. Peiteado, C. Plasencia, E. Martín-Mola Rheumatology Unit, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain

Background: In recent years, remission has emerged as the treatment aim for patients with RA, however, the accuracy of the criteria used to define remission in clinical practice is not sufficient as joint damage may progress in patients considered to be in clinical remission. Recently two new definitions of remission have been proposed by American College of Rheumatology and the European League against Rheumatism 1: When scores on the following measures are all ≤1: tender joint count, swollen joint count, CRP (in mg/dL) and patient global assessment (0-10 scale), or 2: when SDAI ≤3.3.
Objectives: To investigate the accuracy and clinical utility of these two new definitions of remission in classifying rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who are in remission using the absence of inflammatory activity detected by ultrasound (US) as the gold standard.
Methods: This study evaluated a cohort of 100 patients with RA classified as being in clinical remission by their attending rheumatologist using subjective clinical judgment. Patients underwent a complete clinical and laboratory assessment of disease activity using standard core set measures which allow to calculate disease activity scores. US examination of 42 joints was performed in mode B and Power Doppler (PD) and we consider ''US remission'' as the absence of joints with PD signal, which reflects active synovial vascularization.
Results: Synovial hypertrophy (SH) and PD were absent in 4 (4%) and 57 (57%) patients, respectively; however, if only the 28 joints of the reduced articular index had been examined, seven and six additional patients would have been misclassified as lacking SH or PD, respectively.
Forty three (43%) patients were in remission according to SDAI and 51 (51%) when the Boolean based definition was used, of whom 32 (74,4%) and 36 (70.6%) were un US remission respectively. In clinical practice it is also important to know how many patients have been incorrectly classified, 53 (53%) and 49 (49%) patients did not fulfil the new remission criteria, however 25 (43.9%) and 21 (42.9%) respectively were in US remission status.
We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative Likelihood Ratio (LR) for being in remission using the two definitions as shown in Table.
Conclusions: Our results suggest that new remission definitions allow a correct classification of remission in many patients, however, the accuracy is not good enough and more sensitive image techniques will help in making clinical decisions.


Citation: Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70(Suppl3):280

以多普勒超声为金标准验证新版RA缓解定义

 

Balsa A, et al. EULAR 2011. Present No: THU0307.

 

 

背景: 近年来,缓解已成为类风湿关节炎(RA)的治疗目标。然而在临床实践中,由于缓解标准的定义还不够精准,所谓已获临床缓解的病人仍有关节破坏进展。最近ACREULAR共同推荐了有关缓解的两个新定义。其一是以下四个参数值均小于或等于1:压痛关节计数,肿胀关节计数,CRP(mg/dL)和患者对病情的整体评价(0~10比例尺)。其二是SDAI3.3

目的: 以超声(US)作为金标准,探讨这两个RA缓解新定义的准确性记忆临床应用价值。

方法: 本研究纳入了由风湿病医生通过临床检查而判为缓解的100RA病人。按照标准参数组的规定,对患者进行完整的临床和实验室检查以评估疾病活动度,并计算疾病活动评分。采用B超和能量多普勒超声(PD)检查42个关节。我们将超声缓解定义为关节内无PD信号。PD信号反映了活跃的滑膜血管增生。

结果: 未见滑膜增生(SH)PD信号阴性的病例数分别为4(4%)57(57%)。然而,如果仅检查28关节,则分别有7例和6例额外的病人被误判为SH阴性和PD阴性。

SDAI缓解的有43(43%)患者,而基于布尔式缓解定义的有51(51%),他们中间分别有32(4%)36(70.6%)达到超声缓解。在临床实践中同样重要的是要知道有多少病人被错分类。不符合新版缓解标准的分别有53 (53%)49(49%),然而他们中间达到超声缓解的有23(43.9%)21(42.9%)

我们估算了两种缓解定义的敏感性、特异性、阳性及阴性似然比(LR),结果请参见相应表格。

结论: 本研究结果表明新版缓解定义能正确判别众多缓解病人,但准确度尚不足够好,临床需要更敏感的影像学技术以将帮助临床决策。

Table

Absence of PD signal in 28 joints

Absence of PD signal in 42 joints

Sensitivity

Specificity

LR+

LR-

Sensitivity

Specificity

LR+

LR-

SDAI≤3,3

54.0

75.7

2.22

0.61

56.1

74.4

2.19

0.59

(41.8-65.7)

(59.9-86.6)

(1.20-4.09)

(0.44 – 0.83)

(43.3-68.2)

(59.8-85.1)

(1.25-3.84)

(0.42 – 0.83)

Boolean based

61.9

67.6

1.91

0.56

63.2

65.1

1.81

0.57

(49.6-72.9)

(51.5-80.4)

(1.15-3.16)

(0.39–0.81)

(50.2-75.5)

(50.2-77.6)

(1.15-2.85)

(0.38 – 0.84)

 

28个关节无PD信号

42个关节无PD信号

敏感性

特异性

LR+

LR-

敏感性

特异性

LR+

LR-

SDAI≤3,3

54.0

75.7

2.22

0.61

56.1

74.4

2.19

0.59

(41.8-65.7)

(59.9-86.6)

(1.20-4.09)

(0.44 – 0.83)

(43.3-68.2)

(59.8-85.1)

(1.25-3.84)

(0.42 – 0.83)

基于布尔值

61.9

67.6

1.91

0.56

63.2

65.1

1.81

0.57

(49.6-72.9)

(51.5-80.4)

(1.15-3.16)

(0.39–0.81)

(50.2-75.5)

(50.2-77.6)

(1.15-2.85)

(0.38 – 0.84)

 

原文地址:https://www.cnblogs.com/T2T4RD/p/5464249.html