4.0 Article

Temporal artery biopsy in the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis: Does the end justify the means?

Journal

ANNALS OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY
Volume 20, Issue -, Pages 1-5

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2017.06.020

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Early temporal artery biopsy is recommended in all patients with suspected cranial GCA (Giant Cell Arteritis) by the BSR (British Society of Rheumatology) and BHPR (British Health Professionals in Rheumatology) guidelines. This should be performed within one week ideally. Aim: To assess ACR (American College of Rheumatology) score at presentation and whether temporal artery biopsy result affects clinical management of the clinically suspected GCA patient. Method: Case records of all temporal artery biopsies performed within January 2012 until December 2014 were analysed for size and result of biopsy and this was correlated to clinical management following result. Results: 129 temporal arteries were biopsied with a total of 17 positive biopsy results. 10 biopsy samples were insufficient to confirm or refute GCA. 8 patients within the biopsies negative for GCA had their prednisolone therapy stopped. 5 patients had unknown follow up, with the remainder (89, 87.3%) of the patients continued prednisolone management for treatment of GCA for at least 6 weeks. Conclusion: Overall 13.2% of our biopsies were positive for GCA and 87.3% of biopsy negative patients continued prednisolone therapy on clinical grounds. In the face of new diagnostic tests (high resolution MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging), colour duplex USS (Ultra Sound Scan) and PET (Positive Emission Topography) can we justify invasive surgery to all patients on histological grounds when the results may not alter management? Further investigation is needed directly comparing newer imaging modalities to histology. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of IJS Publishing Group Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available