Literature DB >> 20551101

Diagnosis of chronic gout: evaluating the american college of rheumatology proposal, European league against rheumatism recommendations, and clinical judgment.

Ingris Peláez-Ballestas1, Claudia Hernández Cuevas, Rubén Burgos-Vargas, Lizandra Hernández Roque, Leobardo Terán, Jesús Espinoza, Jorge A Esquivel-Valerio, María Victoria Goycochea-Robles, Francisco J Aceves, Ana Guilaisne Bernard, Lucio Ventura, Clara Shumsky, Adolfo Hernández Garduño, Janitzia Vázquez-Mellado.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Observation of monosodium urate (MSU) crystal is the gold standard for diagnosis of gout, but is rarely performed in daily clinical practice, and diagnosis is based on clinical judgment. Our aim was to identify clinical and paraclinical data included in the European League Against Rheumatism recommendations (EULARr) and American College of Rheumatology proposed criteria (ACRp) for diagnosis of gout in patients with chronic gout according to their attending rheumatologists.
METHODS: This cross-sectional and multicenter study included consecutive patients from outpatient clinics with a diagnosis of gout by their attending rheumatologists according to their expertise. The frequency of each item from the ACRp and EULARr was determined. Possible combinations of the items that were frequent, clinically relevant, and simple to evaluate in daily practice were determined.
RESULTS: We studied 549 patients (96% men), mean age 50 +/- 14 years. Analysis of MSU crystals was performed in 15%. We selected 7 clinical criteria and 1 laboratory measure because of their frequency, importance, and simplicity to obtain: current or past history of: > 1 attack of acute arthritis (93%); mono or oligoarthritis attacks (74%); rapid progression of pain and swelling (< 24 hours; 74%); podagra (70%); erythema (56%); unilateral tarsitis (33%); tophi (52%); and hyperuricemia (93%). The chronic gout diagnosis (CGD) proposal comprised >or= 4/8 of these; 88% of patients had the criteria of the CGD proposal while 75% had 6/11 ACRp criteria (p = 0.001). When analysis of MSU crystals was added, 90.1% (CGD) and 83.9% (ACRp) met the criteria (p = 0.004).
CONCLUSION: Current or past history of >or= 4/8 CGD parameters is highly suggestive of chronic gout.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20551101     DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.091385

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rheumatol        ISSN: 0315-162X            Impact factor:   4.666


  15 in total

Review 1.  New classification criteria for gout: a framework for progress.

Authors:  Nicola Dalbeth; Jaap Fransen; Tim L Jansen; Tuhina Neogi; H Ralph Schumacher; William J Taylor
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2013-04-22       Impact factor: 7.580

2.  Performance of the 2015 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism gout classification criteria in Thai patients.

Authors:  Worawit Louthrenoo; Kanon Jatuworapruk; Panomkorn Lhakum; Nuttaya Pattamapaspong
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 2.631

3.  The diagnostic value of the proposal for clinical gout diagnosis (CGD).

Authors:  Janitzia Vázquez-Mellado; Claudia B Hernández-Cuevas; Everardo Alvarez-Hernández; Lucio Ventura-Rios; Ingris Peláez-Ballestas; Julio Casasola-Vargas; Sergio García-Méndez; Rubén Burgos-Vargas
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2011-10-07       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 4.  Gout Classification Criteria: Update and Implications.

Authors:  Ana Beatriz Vargas-Santos; William J Taylor; Tuhina Neogi
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.592

5.  Validity of gout diagnosis in Swedish primary and secondary care - a validation study.

Authors:  Mats Dehlin; Kalliopi Stasinopoulou; Lennart Jacobsson
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  2015 Gout Classification Criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

Authors:  Tuhina Neogi; Tim L Th A Jansen; Nicola Dalbeth; Jaap Fransen; H Ralph Schumacher; Dianne Berendsen; Melanie Brown; Hyon Choi; N Lawrence Edwards; Hein J E M Janssens; Frédéric Lioté; Raymond P Naden; George Nuki; Alexis Ogdie; Fernando Perez-Ruiz; Kenneth Saag; Jasvinder A Singh; John S Sundy; Anne-Kathrin Tausche; Janitzia Vazquez-Mellado; Janitzia Vaquez-Mellado; Steven A Yarows; William J Taylor
Journal:  Arthritis Rheumatol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 10.995

7.  Application of a Novel Diagnostic Rule in the Differential Diagnosis between Acute Gouty Arthritis and Septic Arthritis.

Authors:  Kwang-Hoon Lee; Sang-Tae Choi; Soo-Kyung Lee; Joo-Hyun Lee; Bo-Young Yoon
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Performance of the Existing Classification Criteria for Gout in Thai Patients Presenting With Acute Arthritis.

Authors:  Kanon Jatuworapruk; Panomkorn Lhakum; Nuttaya Pattamapaspong; Nuntana Kasitanon; Suparaporn Wangkaew; Worawit Louthrenoo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 9.  The first metatarsophalangeal joint in gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sarah Stewart; Nicola Dalbeth; Alain C Vandal; Keith Rome
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  2015 Gout classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

Authors:  Tuhina Neogi; Tim L Th A Jansen; Nicola Dalbeth; Jaap Fransen; H Ralph Schumacher; Dianne Berendsen; Melanie Brown; Hyon Choi; N Lawrence Edwards; Hein J E M Janssens; Frédéric Lioté; Raymond P Naden; George Nuki; Alexis Ogdie; Fernando Perez-Ruiz; Kenneth Saag; Jasvinder A Singh; John S Sundy; Anne-Kathrin Tausche; Janitzia Vaquez-Mellado; Steven A Yarows; William J Taylor
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 19.103

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.