4.5 Article

Clinical features of antinuclear antibodies-negative type 1 autoimmune hepatitis

期刊

HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 39, 期 3, 页码 241-246

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1872-034X.2008.00454.x

关键词

acute hepatitis; antinuclear antibody; autoimmune hepatitis; immunoglobulin G

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) are the main serologic markers of type 1 autoimmune hepatitis (AIH); however 20-30% of patients are negative for ANA. We assessed the clinical features of ANA-negative patients. A retrospective analysis was performed of 176 patients with type 1 AIH (153 females, median age 55 years). A diagnosis of AIH was made based on the revised scoring system proposed by the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group. ANA titers were measured using a standard indirect immunofluorescence technique. Thirty-eight patients (22%) had low titers of ANA (1:40 or 1:80), and 114 (65%) had high titers (>= 1:160). Of 24 ANA-negative patients, 15 were positive for smooth muscle antibodies (SMA). Three of nine both ANA- and SMA-negative patients developed ANA during follow-up. The other six were diagnosed based on histological characteristics. Thirteen ANA-negative patients relapsed after the normalization of serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels. ANA-negative patients more frequently showed acute presentation and, at presentation, had lower serum immunoglobulin G levels, higher serum levels of bilirubin and transaminase, and higher frequencies of histological acute hepatitis and zone 3 necrosis than those with high titers. However, the frequency of advanced stage of fibrosis was similar. The response to corticosteroids was not different among the three groups. ANA-negative type 1 AIH shows acute-onset more frequently but may include not only acute autoimmune hepatitis, but also acute exacerbation of inactive chronic disease. Regarding the diagnosis of ANA-negative AIH, the determination of ANA during follow-up and the response to immunosuppressive treatment may be helpful.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据