4.1 Article

Association Between Hypocomplementemia (C3 and C4) and MRI Findings in Different Neuropsychiatric Lupus Syndromes in a Tertiary Hospital

期刊

CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE
卷 13, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.17939

关键词

saudi arabia; complements; mri; npsle; sle

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This retrospective study analyzed the MRI findings of 187 lupus patients and their correlation with complement levels, finding an MRI abnormality rate of 51% in neuropsychiatric systemic lupus patients, predominantly white matter changes. However, there was no statistically significant relationship found between C3/C4 levels and white matter lesions in this sample.
Objective The aim of this study was to describe the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and correlate them with the complements level. Methodology This is a retrospective chart review study involving 187 lupus patients attending the rheumatology clinic during the period between 2010 and 2020. Out of the 187 patients, only 49 patients were diagnosed to have neuropsychiatric lupus manifestation and underwent MRI study. Results We included 49 neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus patients with a mean age of 35.33 years; most of them were Saudi (51%), with disease duration between-six and nine years (40.8%). In regard to MRI brain findings, 51% had abnormal findings, most commonly white matter changes in 42.9% followed by contrast enhancement in 36.7% and mild volume loss in 16.3%. Regarding the complement level, 21 (42.9%) patients had a low C3 level and 35 (71.4%) had a low C4 level. Lastly, following the main objective, C3 and C4 do not have a statistically significant relationship with white matter lesion given the sample of this data (p = 0.589 and p = 0.657, respectively). Conclusion MRI provides a significant clinical information to evaluate neuropsychiatric lupus manifestations. These clinical data can be correlated with immunological findings, which can help in the early diagnosis and management of this disease.

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

4.1
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