Diagnosis and follow up of aortitis in the elderly

Diagnosis and follow up of aortitis in the elderly
复制标题

DOI:
10.1136/ard.2003.015651
复制
发表时间:
2004-11-01
影响因子:
27.4
通讯作者:
Strutz, F
Strutz, F
中科院分区:
医学1区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Scheel, AK;Meller, J;Strutz, F

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

目的:评价MRI和[F-18]FDG-PET扫描与大动脉炎患者临床病程和炎症指标的相关性。方法:对8例临床表现为非特异性GCA样症状的大动脉炎患者进行检查。用[F-18]FDG-PET和MRI诊断和随访大动脉炎。将主动脉分为三个血管区域(升主动脉、主动脉弓和降主动脉),以定位主动脉炎症,并比较两种成像技术。结果:在诊断时,8例患者的24个血管部位中,有20个在[F-18]FDG-PET扫描中呈阳性,而在MRI上,有15/21个主动脉部位呈阳性。患者接受皮质类固醇治疗,平均随访13.3(4.7)个月。在[F-18]FDG-PET中,有11/20(55%)的患者在随访中发现,最初病变的主动脉区域恢复正常,这与临床和实验室随访结果密切相关。结论:[F-18]FDG-PET和MRI均是发现早期大动脉炎的有效方法,且与实验室炎症指标高度相关。然而,在随访检查中,随着临床症状和炎症血清标志物的减少,[F-18]FDG-PET摄取率下降,而MRI扫描则提供了更多的静态结果。
Objectives: To evaluate the correlation of MRI and [F-18]FDG-PET scans with the clinical course and inflammatory markers in patients with aortitis.Methods: Eight patients with aortitis presenting with unspecific GCA-like symptoms were examined. Aortitis was diagnosed and followed up by [F-18]FDG-PET and MRI. The aorta was divided into three vascular regions (ascending aorta, aortic arch, and descending aorta) to localise the aortic inflammation and compare both imaging techniques. Results were correlated with clinical and laboratory examinations.Results: At diagnosis, 20/24 vascular regions from eight patients were positive by [F-18]FDG-PET scan and 15/21 aortic regions by MRI. Patients were treated with corticosteroids and followed up for a mean (SD) of 13.3 (4.7) months. In [F-18]FDG-PET, 11/20 (55%) initially pathological aortic regions returned to normal in the follow up examination, which correlated closely with the clinical and laboratory follow up examination. Conversely, in MRI, 14/15 initially affected vascular regions were unchanged.Conclusions: [F-18]FDG-PET and MRI are both effective techniques for detecting early aortitis and have a high correlation with laboratory inflammatory measures. However, during the follow up examination, [F-18]FDG-PET uptake decreased in line with the clinical symptoms and inflammatory serum markers, whereas MRI scans gave more static results.