We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
[Evaluation of the histologic criteria for the diagnosis of Sjögren's syndrome].
OBJECTIVE: The most important diagnostic criterion in Sjögren's syndrome (SS) is considered to be the histologic focus score of the labial salivary glands. The focus score is defined as the number of lymphocytic foci per 4 mm2 of the salivary gland according to the criterion of Chisholm & Mason. On the other hand, in the criteria of the Sjögren's Disease Research Committee of the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Japan it is defined as the number of lymphocytic foci per a lobule of the salivary gland. By setting the limited criteria for SS on the basis of objective signs of both dry eyes and dry mouth, we compared the usefulness of these two diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of SS in terms of the sensitivity, the specificity and laboratory data.
METHODS: The biopsy of labial salivary glands was performed in 245 patients (230 females and 15 males, with a mean age of 54.9 years) who were suspected of SS in our hospital during the time between 1975 and 1996. Labial salivary glands were histologically assessed and the focus score was calculated according to the criterion of Chisholm & Mason and to that of the Sjögren's Disease Research Committee, respectively.
RESULTS: The average area per a lobule of the salivary gland was 0.70 mm2. According to the limited criteria for SS, the Japanese histologic diagnostic criteria showed a higher specificity (93.3%) and a lower sensitivity (23.5%). The sensitivity of the criterion of Chisholm & Mason was 72.1%, and the specificity was 80.0%. The margin of the lobule was sometimes difficult to be identified because of the fatty change and fibrosis in some salivary glands.
CONCLUSIONS: By comparing the two different histologic criteria using our limited criteria, it was better to use the histologic criterion of Chisholm & Mason as a criterion for the diagnosis of SS than that of the Sjogren's Disease Research Committee of the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Japan in terms of the sensitivity, the specificity and laboratory data.
METHODS: The biopsy of labial salivary glands was performed in 245 patients (230 females and 15 males, with a mean age of 54.9 years) who were suspected of SS in our hospital during the time between 1975 and 1996. Labial salivary glands were histologically assessed and the focus score was calculated according to the criterion of Chisholm & Mason and to that of the Sjögren's Disease Research Committee, respectively.
RESULTS: The average area per a lobule of the salivary gland was 0.70 mm2. According to the limited criteria for SS, the Japanese histologic diagnostic criteria showed a higher specificity (93.3%) and a lower sensitivity (23.5%). The sensitivity of the criterion of Chisholm & Mason was 72.1%, and the specificity was 80.0%. The margin of the lobule was sometimes difficult to be identified because of the fatty change and fibrosis in some salivary glands.
CONCLUSIONS: By comparing the two different histologic criteria using our limited criteria, it was better to use the histologic criterion of Chisholm & Mason as a criterion for the diagnosis of SS than that of the Sjogren's Disease Research Committee of the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Japan in terms of the sensitivity, the specificity and laboratory data.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app