4.8 Article

Close relationship between autoimmune pancreatitis and multifocal fibrosclerosis

期刊

GUT
卷 52, 期 5, 页码 683-687

出版社

BRITISH MED JOURNAL PUBL GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/gut.52.5.683

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Autoimmune pancreatitis is a unique clinical entity proposed recently, and is sometimes associated with inflammation of other organs. Aims: To examine the pathophysiology of the pancreas and other organs in patients with autoimmune pancreatitis. Patients and methods: We evaluated clinicopathological findings in six resected and one autopsied patient with autoimmune pancreatitis. The pancreas, peripancreatic tissue, bile duct, and gall bladder were examined histologically and immunohistochemically. Biopsied salivary gland and cervical lymph node of one patient were also examined. We also performed similar immunohistochemical examinations in pancreatectomy specimens from 10 patients with alcoholic chronic pancreatitis and biopsied salivary glands from five patients with Sjogren's syndrome. Results: Stenosis of the extrahepatic bile duct was detected in all patients. Histological findings were characterised by diffuse lymphoplasmacytic infiltration with marked interstitial fibrosis and acinar atrophy, obliterated phlebitis of the pancreatic veins, and involvement of the portal vein. Immunohistochemically, diffusely infiltrating cells consisted predominantly of CD4 or CD8 positive T lymphocytes and IgG4 positive plasma cells. Similar inflammatory processes also involved the peripancreatic tissue, extrahepatic bile duct, gall bladder, and salivary gland. Lymph nodes were swollen with infiltration of IgG4 positive plasma cells. None of these findings was seen in alcoholic chronic pancreatitis or Sjogren's syndrome. Conclusions: The development of the specific inflammations in extensive organs as well as the pancreas in patients with autoimmune pancreatitis strongly suggests a close relationship between autoimmune pancreatitis and multifocal fibrosclerosis.

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

4.8
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