Collantes E, Veroz R, Escudero A, Muñoz E, Muñoz M C, Cisnal A, Perez V
Service de rhumatologie, hopital universitaire Reina Sofía, département de médecine, université de Cordoue, Córdoba, Spain.
Joint Bone Spine. 2000;67(6):516-20. doi: 10.1016/s1297-319x(00)00201-3.
When evaluating patients for spondyloarthropathy, clinicians use the 'possible spondyloarthropathy' category to indicate that they are unsure about the diagnosis. We sought to determine whether Amor's criteria or the European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group (ESSG) criteria could lift thi uncertainty.
During a Spanish study designed to validate criteria for spondyloar thropathies, 102 patients were classified in the 'possible spondyloarthropathy' category. We divided these patients into subgroups based on whether or not they met criteria for spondyloarthropathy. We compare baseline characteristics (N = 102) and five-year outcomes (N = 52) in these subgroups.
The following features were significantly more common in the subgroups of patients who met Amor's criteria for spondyloarthropathy: oligoarthritis, heel pain, uveitis, balanitis, family history of spondyloarthropathy, an presence of the HLA B27 antigen. No differences were found for age at symptom onset, disease duration, buttock pain, gender, dactylitis, diarrhea, or psoriasis. Of the 52 patients followed up for five years, 17 me Amor's criteria at baseline and 13 were subsequently found to have definite spondyloarthropathy, whic was undifferentiated in six cases. There were only three cases of spondyloarthropathy among the 2 patients who did not meet Amor's criteria at baseline. Of the 28 patients who met ESSG criteria at baseline, 13 had spondyloarthropathy versus three of the 17 patients who did not meet ESSG criteria at baseline
Amor's criteria or the ESSG criteria allow early classification of most patients with 'possible spondyloarthropathy' and early identification of undifferentiated spondyloarthropathy corresponding to minimal-symptom or incipient disease. In this study, Amor's criteria performed better than the ESSG criteria.
在评估脊柱关节病患者时,临床医生使用“可能的脊柱关节病”类别来表明他们对诊断不确定。我们试图确定阿莫尔标准或欧洲脊柱关节病研究组(ESSG)标准是否能消除这种不确定性。
在一项旨在验证脊柱关节病标准的西班牙研究中,102例患者被归类为“可能的脊柱关节病”类别。我们根据这些患者是否符合脊柱关节病标准将他们分为亚组。我们比较了这些亚组的基线特征(N = 102)和五年结局(N = 52)。
在符合阿莫尔脊柱关节病标准的患者亚组中,以下特征明显更为常见:少关节炎、足跟痛、葡萄膜炎、龟头炎、脊柱关节病家族史以及HLA B27抗原的存在。在症状发作年龄、病程、臀部疼痛、性别、指(趾)炎、腹泻或银屑病方面未发现差异。在随访五年的52例患者中,17例在基线时符合阿莫尔标准,其中13例随后被确诊为明确的脊柱关节病,6例为未分化型。在基线时不符合阿莫尔标准的24例患者中,只有3例发生脊柱关节病。在基线时符合ESSG标准的28例患者中,13例患有脊柱关节病,而在基线时不符合ESSG标准的17例患者中有3例患有脊柱关节病。
阿莫尔标准或ESSG标准能够对大多数“可能的脊柱关节病”患者进行早期分类,并能早期识别与轻微症状或疾病初期相对应的未分化脊柱关节病。在本研究中,阿莫尔标准的表现优于ESSG标准。