Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Re-evaluation of 129 patients with systemic necrotizing vasculitides by using classification algorithm according to consensus methodology

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, a new classification algorithm (CA) for systemic necrotizing vasculitides was proposed by Watts et al. (Annals Rheum Dis 66:222–227, 2007) by using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), Chapel Hill Consensus Criteria (CHCC) and Sorensen surrogate markers (So). We aimed to validate CA in our patients. One hundred twenty-nine patients followed up in our vasculitis clinic were reclassified according to CA in different categories (ACR or Lanham criteria in “1” for Churg–Strauss Syndrome (CSS); ACR in “2a”; CHCC-Wegener's granulomatosis (WG) in “2b”; CHCC-microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), So-WG in “2c”; So-WG, proteinase 3 (PR3) or myeloperoxidase antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (MPO ANCA) serology in “2d” for WG; clinical features and histology compatible with small vessel vasculitis without So-WG in “3a”; So-MPA, PR3 or MPO ANCA serology in “3b” for MPA; CHCC-classic-polyarteritis nodosa (c-PAN) or typical angiographic features in “4” for c-PAN; unclassifiable in “5”). Kappa statistic was used to analyse the agreement of the criteria that formed the algorithm. All of 12 CSS, 91% of 69 WG, 78% of 18 MPA and 93% of 26 c-PAN patients remained in their previous diagnosis. WG patients were placed in 2a (83%), 2c (3%), 2d (14%) categories. Four WG (6%) and four MPA (22%) patients were categorized as MPA (in 3a (75%), 3b (25%)) and WG (in 2c (75%), 2d (25%)), respectively. Three of four unclassified patients could be classified as c-PAN (two) and MPA (one). Significant agreement was demonstrated only for ACR and So criteria in WG (κ = 0.62, p < 0.001). The majority of our patients stayed on their previous diagnosis in “CA”. Our findings suggest that this algorithm is helpful and practical for epidemiological studies. Poor correlation of defined criteria was thought to be related to the fact that each criteria mainly consist of different characteristics of vasculitides such as clinical, histopathological and serological features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zeek PM (1952) Periarteritis nodosa—a clinical review. Am J Clin Pathol 22:777–790

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Woude FJ, Rasmussen N, Lobatto S et al (1985) Autoantibodies against neutrophils and monocytes: tool for diagnosis and marker of disease activity in Wegener's granulomatosis. Lancet 23:425–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Leavitt RY, Fauci AS, Bloch DA et al (1990) The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Wegener's granulomatosis. Arthritis Rheum 33:1101–1107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Masi AT, Hunder GG, Lie JT et al (1990) The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Churg–Strauss syndrome (allergic granulomatosis and angiitis). Arthritis Rheum 33:1094–1100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lightfood RW, Michel BA, Bloch DA et al (1990) The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of polyarteritis nodosa. Arthritis Rheum 33:1088–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jennette JC, Falk RJ, Andrassy K et al (1994) Nomenclature of systemic vasculitides. Proposal of an international concensus conference. Arthritis Rheum 37:187–192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sorensen SF, Slot O, Tvede N, Petersen J (2000) A prospective study of vasculitis patients collected in 5 year period: evaluation of the Chapell Hill nomenclature. Ann Rheum Dis 59:478–482

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Watts R, Lane S, Hanslik T et al (2007) Development and validation of a consensus methodology for the classification of the ANCA-associated vasculitides and polyarteritis nodosa for epidemiological studies. Ann Rheum Dis 66:222–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bruce IN, Bell AL (1997) A comparison of two nomenclature systems for primary systemic vasculitis. Br J Rheumatol 36:453–458

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu LJ, Chen M, Yu F, Zhao MH, Wang HY (2008) Evaluation of a new algorithm in classification of systemic vasculitis. Rheumatology 47:708–712

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tzelepis GE, Kokosi M, Tzioufas A et al (2010) Prevalence and outcome of pulmonary fibrosis in microscopic polyangiitis. Eur Respir J 36:116–121

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Manganelli P, Fietta P, Carotti M, Pesci A, Salaffi F (2006) Respiratory system involvement in systemic vasculitides. Clin Exp Rheumatol 24(Suppl 41):48–59

    Google Scholar 

  13. Franssen CF, Stegeman CA, Kallenberg CG et al (2000) Antiproteinase 3- and antimyeloperoxidase-associated vasculitis. Kidney Int 57:2195–2206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jayne DR, Rasmussen N (1997) Treatment of antineutrophil cytoplasm autoantibody-associated systemic vasculitis: initiatives of the European Community Systemic Vasculitis Clinical Trials Study Group. Mayo Clin Proc 72:737–747

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sevil Kamali.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kamali, S., Artim-Esen, B., Erer, B. et al. Re-evaluation of 129 patients with systemic necrotizing vasculitides by using classification algorithm according to consensus methodology. Clin Rheumatol 31, 325–328 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-011-1793-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-011-1793-3

Keywords

Navigation