Referrals for rheumatologic evaluation following a positive antinuclear antibody test result. A cross-sectional single center Brazilian study.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Leonardo Borgato Della Vecchia, Caio Delano Campos Oliveira Assis, Fernando de Oliveira Salatiel, Maria Thereza Santos Cirino, Maria Eduarda Vogel Scarpante, Vanessa Monteiro Oliveira, Letícia Pedroso Meneghin, Maria Júlia Gonçalves Silva, Victória Ferini Dos Santos, Natália Pavoni Catardo, Isabela Pulini Nemesio, Lívia Loamí Ruyz Jorge de Paula, Carolina Borges Garcia Sasdelli, Ana Beatriz Santos Bacchiega
{"title":"Referrals for rheumatologic evaluation following a positive antinuclear antibody test result. A cross-sectional single center Brazilian study.","authors":"Leonardo Borgato Della Vecchia, Caio Delano Campos Oliveira Assis, Fernando de Oliveira Salatiel, Maria Thereza Santos Cirino, Maria Eduarda Vogel Scarpante, Vanessa Monteiro Oliveira, Letícia Pedroso Meneghin, Maria Júlia Gonçalves Silva, Victória Ferini Dos Santos, Natália Pavoni Catardo, Isabela Pulini Nemesio, Lívia Loamí Ruyz Jorge de Paula, Carolina Borges Garcia Sasdelli, Ana Beatriz Santos Bacchiega","doi":"10.1186/s42358-024-00390-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In general, patients are referred for rheumatological evaluation due to isolated laboratory abnormalities, especially antinuclear antibody (ANA) positivity, with the risk of more severe patients remaining on the waiting list for longer than desired. The aim of this study was to analyze the demographic, clinical, and laboratory information of patients referred to a specialized rheumatological care unit because of positive antinuclear antibody.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective study of 99 out of 1670 patients seen by the same rheumatologist between 01/01/2011 and 01/01/2019. Patients whose referrals were exclusively due to the ANA test result and the specialist's final diagnosis being \"abnormal finding of serum immunological test\" (ICD-10 R769) were included. Sociodemographic, clinical, and laboratory information were extracted from the consulting rheumatologist's chart. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 99 patients were included, most of whom were female (84.8%) with a median age of 49 years. At the moment of specialist's appointment, 97 patients (97.9%) repeated the ANA test, and 77 patients remained positive. Of these, only 35 (35.35%) were in a high titer range (greater than or equal to 1:320). Complete blood count for cytopenia's investigation was not performed in a high percentage of patients (22.2%), as well as urinalysis (31.3%). In addition, more than 70% of patients score 0 to 1 classification criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, according to SLE - ACR 1987 (American College of Rheumatology) and SLICC 2012 (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most patients are still referred for specialized evaluation due to the misinterpretation of laboratory tests that were inappropriately requested in patients without clinical evidence of autoimmune rheumatic disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42358-024-00390-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In general, patients are referred for rheumatological evaluation due to isolated laboratory abnormalities, especially antinuclear antibody (ANA) positivity, with the risk of more severe patients remaining on the waiting list for longer than desired. The aim of this study was to analyze the demographic, clinical, and laboratory information of patients referred to a specialized rheumatological care unit because of positive antinuclear antibody.

Methods: This is a retrospective study of 99 out of 1670 patients seen by the same rheumatologist between 01/01/2011 and 01/01/2019. Patients whose referrals were exclusively due to the ANA test result and the specialist's final diagnosis being "abnormal finding of serum immunological test" (ICD-10 R769) were included. Sociodemographic, clinical, and laboratory information were extracted from the consulting rheumatologist's chart. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.

Results: A total of 99 patients were included, most of whom were female (84.8%) with a median age of 49 years. At the moment of specialist's appointment, 97 patients (97.9%) repeated the ANA test, and 77 patients remained positive. Of these, only 35 (35.35%) were in a high titer range (greater than or equal to 1:320). Complete blood count for cytopenia's investigation was not performed in a high percentage of patients (22.2%), as well as urinalysis (31.3%). In addition, more than 70% of patients score 0 to 1 classification criteria for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, according to SLE - ACR 1987 (American College of Rheumatology) and SLICC 2012 (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics).

Conclusions: Most patients are still referred for specialized evaluation due to the misinterpretation of laboratory tests that were inappropriately requested in patients without clinical evidence of autoimmune rheumatic disease.

抗核抗体检测结果呈阳性后的风湿病学评估转诊。巴西单中心横断面研究。
背景:一般来说,患者因个别实验室异常,尤其是抗核抗体(ANA)阳性而被转诊接受风湿病学评估,病情较重的患者在候诊名单上等待的时间有可能超过预期。本研究旨在分析因抗核抗体阳性而转诊至风湿病专科医院的患者的人口统计学、临床和实验室信息:这是一项回顾性研究,研究对象是 2011 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 1 月 1 日期间由同一风湿病医生诊治的 1670 名患者中的 99 名。研究纳入了完全因 ANA 检测结果而转诊的患者,专家的最终诊断为 "血清免疫学检测异常发现"(ICD-10 R769)。社会人口学、临床和实验室信息均从会诊风湿病医生的病历中提取。数据分析采用描述性统计方法:共纳入 99 名患者,其中大部分为女性(84.8%),中位年龄为 49 岁。在专家预约时,97 名患者(97.9%)重复了 ANA 检测,77 名患者的检测结果仍为阳性。其中,只有 35 人(35.35%)处于高滴度范围(大于或等于 1:320)。很多患者(22.2%)没有进行全血细胞计数检查,也没有进行尿液分析(31.3%)。此外,根据系统性红斑狼疮 - ACR 1987(美国风湿病学会)和 SLICC 2012(系统性红斑狼疮国际合作诊所),70% 以上的患者系统性红斑狼疮分类标准为 0 至 1 分:结论:大多数患者仍需转诊接受专门评估,原因是他们对实验室检查的误解,因为这些检查是在没有自身免疫性风湿病临床证据的情况下不适当地要求患者进行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信