Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026
Clinical performance of obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome classification criteria: an ambispective cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Liu Huimin, Zhang Yuzhu, Wang Shumin, Huang Wanrong, Hu Zhengyan, Han Jinbiao, Zeng Xun, Qin Lang, Gao Rui
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical performance of the 2006 Sydney and 2023 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS), compare subsequent pregnancy outcomes across classifications and develop a supplementary classification method to further identify clinically relevant non-criteria OAPS (NC-OAPS) cases missed by the Sydney-derived NC-OAPS classification.
METHODS: This single-center ambispective cohort included 1741 women of reproductive age enrolled from January 2020 to October 2024. Expert consensus was used to classify participants into OAPS, NC-OAPS and non-OAPS groups. The clinical performance of the 2006 Sydney criteria, 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria and Sydney-derived NC-OAPS classification were assessed. The subsequent pregnancy outcomes were followed up and compared across different groups. Moreover, a supplementary NC-OAPS classification method was developed and validated.
RESULTS: The Sydney criteria identified expert-defined OAPS with sensitivity 0.806, specificity 0.991 and AUC 0.898. The 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria showed lower sensitivity (0.267) but near-perfect specificity (0.999). Live birth rates were similar among expert-defined OAPS, NC-OAPS and non-OAPS after treatment, but OAPS had higher rates of preterm birth, fetal growth restriction and severe pre-eclampsia/eclampsia. Patients fulfilling 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria had poorer pregnancy outcomes than those identified by expert consensus or the Sydney criteria. In the validation folds, the supplementary method yielded a sensitivity of 0.732 and a specificity of 0.921.
CONCLUSION: The 2006 Sydney criteria remain more suitable for clinical identification of OAPS, whereas the 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria may be useful for high-risk stratification. The supplementary classification method may improve recognition of NC-OAPS patients missed by existing criteria.
METHODS: This single-center ambispective cohort included 1741 women of reproductive age enrolled from January 2020 to October 2024. Expert consensus was used to classify participants into OAPS, NC-OAPS and non-OAPS groups. The clinical performance of the 2006 Sydney criteria, 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria and Sydney-derived NC-OAPS classification were assessed. The subsequent pregnancy outcomes were followed up and compared across different groups. Moreover, a supplementary NC-OAPS classification method was developed and validated.
RESULTS: The Sydney criteria identified expert-defined OAPS with sensitivity 0.806, specificity 0.991 and AUC 0.898. The 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria showed lower sensitivity (0.267) but near-perfect specificity (0.999). Live birth rates were similar among expert-defined OAPS, NC-OAPS and non-OAPS after treatment, but OAPS had higher rates of preterm birth, fetal growth restriction and severe pre-eclampsia/eclampsia. Patients fulfilling 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria had poorer pregnancy outcomes than those identified by expert consensus or the Sydney criteria. In the validation folds, the supplementary method yielded a sensitivity of 0.732 and a specificity of 0.921.
CONCLUSION: The 2006 Sydney criteria remain more suitable for clinical identification of OAPS, whereas the 2023 ACR/EULAR criteria may be useful for high-risk stratification. The supplementary classification method may improve recognition of NC-OAPS patients missed by existing criteria.