Medicina clinica · 1997
[Clinical and biological markers of secondary uveitis: results of a discriminant analysis].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Herranz Marín M T, Jiménez-Alonso J, Delgado Rodríguez M, Omar M, Rivera Cívico F, Martín Armada M, Siles M J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The association of uveitis and systemic disease is well known. Patients suffering from uveitis often undergo a extensive battery of tests in order to detect underlying disease, but the efficiency of such screening is uncertain. The aim of this study was to investigate useful clinical data for recognizing secondary uveitis.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective analysis of 115 patients with uveitis of unknown etiology. All of them were included in an extensive protocol study. Four groups were considered: specific ocular disease (SOD), idiopathic uveitis, HLA-B27 associated uveitis without arthritis (HLA-B27-AU) and secondary uveitis. Groups were compared by analysis of variance for continuous variables, and chi 2 test or Student's t-test for discrete variables. A stepwise multiple discriminant analysis was performed for ranking the variables in order of their usefulness for distinguishing idiopathic and secondary uveitis.
RESULTS: We diagnosed 11 SOD (9.6%), 54 idiopathic uveitis (47%), 6 HLA-B27-AU (5.2%) and 41 secondary uveitis (35.7%). The discriminant analysis showed that age, an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, presence of cutaneous lesion, joint pain and genital ulcers are the strongest predictors of secondary uveitis. This model classification functions detected 92.5% of idiopathic uveitis and 72% of secondary uveitis. The global percentage of patients with a correct diagnosis was 84.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: Anamnesis, physical examination and basic laboratory tests are sufficient tools for the diagnostic approach of the majority of patients with uveitis. Subsequent diagnostic procedures must be planned in each patient to confirm a specific disease.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective analysis of 115 patients with uveitis of unknown etiology. All of them were included in an extensive protocol study. Four groups were considered: specific ocular disease (SOD), idiopathic uveitis, HLA-B27 associated uveitis without arthritis (HLA-B27-AU) and secondary uveitis. Groups were compared by analysis of variance for continuous variables, and chi 2 test or Student's t-test for discrete variables. A stepwise multiple discriminant analysis was performed for ranking the variables in order of their usefulness for distinguishing idiopathic and secondary uveitis.
RESULTS: We diagnosed 11 SOD (9.6%), 54 idiopathic uveitis (47%), 6 HLA-B27-AU (5.2%) and 41 secondary uveitis (35.7%). The discriminant analysis showed that age, an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, presence of cutaneous lesion, joint pain and genital ulcers are the strongest predictors of secondary uveitis. This model classification functions detected 92.5% of idiopathic uveitis and 72% of secondary uveitis. The global percentage of patients with a correct diagnosis was 84.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: Anamnesis, physical examination and basic laboratory tests are sufficient tools for the diagnostic approach of the majority of patients with uveitis. Subsequent diagnostic procedures must be planned in each patient to confirm a specific disease.