4.2 Article

Nailfold Videocapillaroscopy Changes Are Associated With the Presence and Severity of Systemic Sclerosis-Related Interstitial Lung Disease

期刊

JCR-JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 25, 期 3, 页码 E12-E15

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000000815

关键词

interstitial lung disease; lung function tests; nailfold videocapillaroscopy; systemic sclerosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of nailfold videocapillaroscopy (NVC) changes and the presence and severity of interstitial lung disease (ILD) in systemic sclerosis. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of 48 systemic sclerosis patients (21 patients with ILD). The NVC characteristics considered were capillary organization, capillary loss (CL), avascular areas, enlarged and giant capillaries, hemorrhages, abnormally shaped capillaries, edema, and intermittent flux. We analyzed the association between NVC findings and (1) presence and extension of ILD and (2) percent predicted of forced vital capacity (FVC) and the carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLCO). Results: Capillary loss and avascular areas showed a significant association with the presence of ILD (odds ratio, 18.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.17-158.72 [p=0.008]; and odds ratio, 4.64; 95% CI, 1.35-15.91 [p=0.015], respectively). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis confirmed the association between CL and ILD (area under the ROC curve, 90.1%; 95% CI, 81.8-91.4). Avascular areas and CL were associated with a worse pulmonary function (FVC -18.1% [p=0.034], DLCO -14.0% [p=0.013]; and FVC -15.3% [p=0.086], DLCO -12.3% [p=0.049], respectively). No association was found between other NVC findings and ILD or lung function. Conclusions: Capillary loss and avascular area showed a significant association with the presence of ILD, supported by ROC curve analysis. These results may reinforce a prognostic role for NVC and a physiopathology mechanism for ILD based on vascular damage.

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

4.2
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