Suppr超能文献

难治性狼疮性肾炎:一项调查

Refractory lupus nephritis: a survey.

作者信息

Weidenbusch M, Bai Y, Eder J, Anders H J

机构信息

Medizinische Klinik and Poliklinik IV, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Lupus. 2019 Apr;28(4):455-464. doi: 10.1177/0961203319828516. Epub 2019 Feb 12.

Abstract

'Refractory lupus nephritis' is a frequently used term but poorly defined. We conducted a survey among nephrologists and rheumatologists to spot the diversity of perceptions of this term and to better understand the clinical practice related to 'refractory lupus nephritis'. A total of 145 questionnaires completed by lupus nephritis experts were available for analysis, of which 52% were nephrologists, 34% rheumatologists, and 13% internists. Response to induction treatment was mostly assessed after six months (58%), but assessment at three months was more common with the use of the EURO lupus protocol than with other treatment protocols. Rheumatologists used urinary sediment to assess response more frequently than nephrologists (66 vs. 48%, p < 0.05, Chi), while nephrologists conversely relied significantly more on clinical symptoms (61 vs. 31%, p < 0.0001, Chi). Non-nephrologists quantified proteinuria preferentially by 24 h urine sampling, while the majority of nephrologists relied on the urinary protein/creatinine ratio (UPCR) or the albumin/creatinine ratio of spot urine samples (59 vs. 38%, p < 0.05, Chi). A total of 91% were concerned about persistent immunological systemic lupus erythematosus activity. There was less concern about drug adherence, renal scarring, genetic factors or other kidney diseases. Less than 20% check for drug adherence by regularly monitoring drug plasma levels. Nephrologists considered a re-biopsy more often than rheumatologists (58 vs. 38%, p < 0.05, Chi). Together, among lupus nephritis experts there is considerable diversity in the perception of what the term 'refractory lupus nephritis' describes and how it is defined. A consensus definition of 'refractory lupus nephritis' is needed.

摘要

“难治性狼疮性肾炎”是一个常用术语,但定义模糊。我们对肾脏病学家和风湿病学家进行了一项调查,以发现对该术语认知的多样性,并更好地了解与“难治性狼疮性肾炎”相关的临床实践。共有145份由狼疮性肾炎专家填写的问卷可供分析,其中52%为肾脏病学家,34%为风湿病学家,13%为内科医生。诱导治疗的反应大多在6个月后评估(58%),但使用欧洲狼疮方案时,3个月时的评估比其他治疗方案更常见。与肾脏病学家相比,风湿病学家更频繁地使用尿沉渣来评估反应(66%对48%,p<0.05,卡方检验),而肾脏病学家则相反,更多地依赖临床症状(61%对31%,p<0.0001,卡方检验)。非肾脏病学家优先通过24小时尿样来定量蛋白尿,而大多数肾脏病学家则依赖尿蛋白/肌酐比值(UPCR)或即时尿样的白蛋白/肌酐比值(59%对38%,p<0.05,卡方检验)。共有91%的人关注系统性红斑狼疮持续的免疫活动。对药物依从性、肾瘢痕形成、遗传因素或其他肾脏疾病的关注较少。不到20%的人通过定期监测药物血浆水平来检查药物依从性。肾脏病学家比风湿病学家更常考虑再次活检(58%对38%,p<0.05,卡方检验)。总体而言,在狼疮性肾炎专家中,对于“难治性狼疮性肾炎”这一术语所描述的内容及其定义方式,存在相当大的认知差异。需要对“难治性狼疮性肾炎”给出一个共识定义。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验