Suppr超能文献

心肌炎与心内膜心肌活检

Myocarditis and endomyocardial biopsy.

作者信息

Edwards W D

出版信息

Cardiol Clin. 1984 Nov;2(4):647-56.

PMID:6544648
Abstract

There is little correlation between the clinical and the biopsy tissue diagnoses of myocarditis, and both are prone to false-positive and false-negative interpretations. Perhaps the most common error that leads to a false-positive clinical diagnosis of myocarditis is the preconceived but unproved notion that unexplained heart failure of sudden onset or rapid progression must be due to myocarditis. Therefore, most clinical diagnoses of myocarditis are presumptive and are never proved "beyond all reasonable doubt." False-negative clinical diagnoses may occur in patients with myocarditis in whom signs and symptoms are atypical or absent. The two most common sources of error that result in a false-positive biopsy tissue diagnosis of myocarditis are a failure to recognize how many lymphocytes normally occupy the myocardial interstitium and a misinterpretation of noninflammatory interstitial cells as lymphocytes. Sampling error may be the most common cause of false-negative tissue diagnoses in patients with myocarditis. Myocarditis is characterized histologically by an inflammatory infiltrate and by injury to myocardial cells that is not typical of infarction. Healing may occur by resolution or fibrosis. I believe that quantitative evidence of an interstitial leukocytic infiltrate is currently the best histopathologic criterion for the diagnosis of myocarditis in biopsy tissue. In the setting of clinically suspected myocarditis, the tissue diagnosis of myocarditis in a patient's first biopsy should be designated as present, borderline, or absent. In subsequent biopsies, the myocarditis should be evaluated in a temporal as well as a qualitative or quantitative sense and designated as ongoing, resolving, or resolved. The nature of the inflammatory infiltrate and the extent of fibrosis should also be stated in all such biopsies. The pathologist should render an evaluation that is as accurate and unbiased as possible, since patients with a tissue diagnosis of myocarditis often receive immunosuppressive therapy that may have associated morbidity or even mortality.

摘要

心肌炎的临床诊断与活检组织诊断之间相关性甚微,且两者均容易出现假阳性和假阴性结果。导致心肌炎临床诊断出现假阳性的最常见错误,或许是那种先入为主但未经证实的观念,即突发或快速进展的不明原因心力衰竭必定是由心肌炎所致。因此,大多数心肌炎的临床诊断都是推测性的,从未得到“排除合理怀疑”的证实。心肌炎患者若体征和症状不典型或不存在,可能会出现临床诊断假阴性。导致心肌炎活检组织诊断出现假阳性的两个最常见错误来源,一是未能认识到正常情况下心肌间质中有多少淋巴细胞,二是将非炎性间质细胞误判为淋巴细胞。抽样误差可能是心肌炎患者组织诊断出现假阴性的最常见原因。心肌炎在组织学上的特征是炎性浸润以及心肌细胞损伤,这种损伤并非梗死典型表现。愈合可通过消散或纤维化实现。我认为,间质白细胞浸润的定量证据目前是活检组织中诊断心肌炎的最佳组织病理学标准。在临床怀疑心肌炎的情况下,患者首次活检时心肌炎的组织诊断应判定为存在、临界或不存在。在后续活检中,应从时间以及定性或定量方面评估心肌炎,并判定为持续、好转或已愈。所有此类活检还应说明炎性浸润的性质和纤维化程度。病理学家应尽可能做出准确且无偏倚的评估,因为组织诊断为心肌炎的患者通常会接受免疫抑制治疗,而这种治疗可能伴有发病率甚至死亡率。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验