Suppr超能文献

红斑狼疮的初步皮肤学第一步标准和系统性红斑狼疮的第二步标准。

Preliminary, dermatologic first step criteria for lupus erythematosus and second step criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus.

作者信息

Beutner E H, Blaszczyk M, Jablonska S, Chorzelski T P, White D, Wolska H, Davis B

机构信息

Department of Microbiology, University of Buffalo, SUNY 14214.

出版信息

Int J Dermatol. 1993 Sep;32(9):645-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-4362.1993.tb04019.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Comparisons of cases of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with cases of rheumatoid arthritis and other rheumatologic disorders affords the basis of the 1982 revised criteria of the American Rheumatism Association (ARA) for classifying SLE cases. We address three questions: Do comparisons of LE cases with non-LE cases that have suggestive skin lesions yield criteria for use in dermatology clinics for primary classification of cases with photo distributions of skin lesions? Do comparisons of SLE with cutaneous LE cases yield the same or similar criteria to the revised ARA criteria for SLE? How should subacute cutaneous LE cases be evaluated for signs of significant systemic involvement?

METHODS

Discriminant analyses on 168 cases with skin lesions suggestive of LE were performed using data based on the ARA criteria for SLE and study factors for cutaneous LE suggested by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.

RESULTS

These yielded two sets of criteria: (1) The 11 preliminary, dermatologic first step criteria (10 plus 1 for discoid lesions and histology) serve to classify cases as LE or non-LE. (2) The 11 preliminary, dermatologic second step criteria classify LE cases as cutaneous LE or systemic LE. Interestingly, 5 of 11 of these second step criteria differ from the 11 ARA criteria for systemic LE. These second step criteria afford a useful means of distinguishing between subacute cutaneous LE cases with or without significant systemic involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The study factors included in both the first and the second step criteria fall into three groups, notably clinical criteria, laboratory criteria, and "added study factors." The latter factors distinguish between the groups compared (LE vs. non-LE and cutaneous vs. systemic LE) but not as well as the study factors included as "criteria."

摘要

背景

将系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)病例与类风湿关节炎及其他风湿性疾病病例进行比较,为美国风湿病协会(ARA)1982年修订的SLE病例分类标准提供了依据。我们探讨三个问题:将有提示性皮肤病变的红斑狼疮(LE)病例与非LE病例进行比较,是否能得出可用于皮肤科诊所对有光分布性皮肤病变病例进行初步分类的标准?将SLE与皮肤型LE病例进行比较,是否能得出与ARA修订的SLE标准相同或相似的标准?亚急性皮肤型LE病例应如何评估是否有显著的全身受累迹象?

方法

基于ARA的SLE标准和欧洲皮肤病与性病学会提出的皮肤型LE研究因素,对168例有提示性LE皮肤病变的病例进行判别分析。

结果

得出两组标准:(1)11项初步的皮肤科第一步标准(盘状红斑及组织学检查共10项加1项)用于将病例分类为LE或非LE。(2)11项初步的皮肤科第二步标准将LE病例分类为皮肤型LE或系统性LE。有趣的是,这11项第二步标准中有5项与ARA的11项系统性LE标准不同。这些第二步标准为区分有无显著全身受累的亚急性皮肤型LE病例提供了一种有用的方法。

结论

第一步和第二步标准中包含的研究因素分为三组,即临床标准、实验室标准和“附加研究因素”。后一组因素可区分所比较的组别(LE与非LE以及皮肤型与系统性LE),但不如作为“标准”纳入的研究因素区分效果好。

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