van der Meulen M F, Hoogendijk J E, Jansen G H, Veldman H, Wokke J H
Department of Neurology, University Hospital Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1998 Mar;64(3):396-8. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.64.3.396.
According to recently published criteria a diagnosis of definite sporadic inclusion body myositis is made if the typical histopathological abnormalities (rimmed vacuoles and abnormal accumulations of proteins, in addition to mononuclear cell infiltrates) are present. The two women described here presented with myositis which was unresponsive to treatment. Patient 1 had features of non-progressive sporadic inclusion body myositis clinically, whereas patient 2 had a very slowly progressive limb girdle syndrome. The cryostat sections of the first biopsies did not show rimmed vacuoles, even in retrospect. Only a repeated biopsy, 12 years after presentation in one patient and 18 years after presentation in the other, disclosed the typical features of sporadic inclusion body myositis. The initial absence of abnormal fibres probably represents a real absence or scarcity rather then a sampling error due to a multifocal nature of the histological abnormalities. It is of importance for the clinician to realise that some patients with myositis unresponsive to treatment, even if both clinical and histological features do not suggest sporadic inclusion body myositis, may prove to have the disease on repeated histopathological examination.
根据最近公布的标准,如果存在典型的组织病理学异常(镶边空泡、蛋白质异常积聚以及单核细胞浸润),则可诊断为明确的散发性包涵体肌炎。这里描述的两名女性均患有对治疗无反应的肌炎。患者1临床上具有非进行性散发性包涵体肌炎的特征,而患者2患有进展非常缓慢的肢带综合征。首次活检的低温切片即使事后回顾也未显示镶边空泡。仅在一名患者发病12年后和另一名患者发病18年后进行的重复活检才揭示了散发性包涵体肌炎的典型特征。最初未出现异常纤维可能代表真正的缺失或稀少,而非由于组织学异常的多灶性导致的抽样误差。临床医生必须认识到,一些对治疗无反应的肌炎患者,即使临床和组织学特征均不提示散发性包涵体肌炎,但在重复组织病理学检查时仍可能被证实患有该病。