Nicholas H Andrew1, Nicole Sladden2, Daniel J Kearney2, Dinesh Selva1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 2. Department of Surgical Pathology, SA Pathology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: To determine the proportion of idiopathic orbital inflammation (IOI) and orbital benign lymphoid hyperplasia (OBLH) accounted for by immunoglobulin (Ig)G4-related orbital disease (IgG4-ROD) using the comprehensive diagnostic criteria for IgG4-related disease published by Umehara et al and the consensus diagnostic criteria published by Deshpande et al. Secondary aims were to compare the histological and clinical features of IgG4-ROD and non-IgG4-ROD cases, and to compare IgG4-ROD cases diagnosed using the comprehensive diagnostic criteria with those diagnosed using the consensus diagnostic criteria. METHODS: A retrospective histopathological review and clinical case series. 55 cases of biopsy-confirmed non-granulomatous IOI and 10 cases of biopsy-confirmed OBLH were included. The intensity of sclerosis, lymphoplasmacytic infiltration and eosinophilic infiltration was graded from 0 to 3+ using a standardised and validated scoring system. RESULTS: IgG4-ROD accounted for 50% and 40% of cases originally diagnosed as OBLH and 23.6% and 5.4% of cases originally diagnosed as IOI, using the comprehensive diagnostic criteria and the consensus diagnostic criteria, respectively. IgG4-ROD cases had numerous significant histological differences, but relatively few significant clinical differences, from non-IgG4-ROD cases. Compared with the comprehensive diagnostic criteria, the consensus diagnostic criteria identified a group of IgG4-ROD cases with a slightly higher ratio of IgG4+ to IgG+ (p=0.01) and a slightly longer duration of symptoms (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest review of IgG4 staining among biopsy-confirmed IOI and OBLH. IgG4-ROD accounted for a substantial proportion of OBLH. The prevalence among cases of IOI was considerably reduced when the consensus diagnostic criteria were used in place of the comprehensive diagnostic criteria. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
AIM: To determine the proportion of idiopathic orbital inflammation (IOI) and orbital benign lymphoid hyperplasia (OBLH) accounted for by immunoglobulin (Ig)G4-related orbital disease (IgG4-ROD) using the comprehensive diagnostic criteria for IgG4-related disease published by Umehara et al and the consensus diagnostic criteria published by Deshpande et al. Secondary aims were to compare the histological and clinical features of IgG4-ROD and non-IgG4-ROD cases, and to compare IgG4-ROD cases diagnosed using the comprehensive diagnostic criteria with those diagnosed using the consensus diagnostic criteria. METHODS: A retrospective histopathological review and clinical case series. 55 cases of biopsy-confirmed non-granulomatous IOI and 10 cases of biopsy-confirmed OBLH were included. The intensity of sclerosis, lymphoplasmacytic infiltration and eosinophilic infiltration was graded from 0 to 3+ using a standardised and validated scoring system. RESULTS: IgG4-ROD accounted for 50% and 40% of cases originally diagnosed as OBLH and 23.6% and 5.4% of cases originally diagnosed as IOI, using the comprehensive diagnostic criteria and the consensus diagnostic criteria, respectively. IgG4-ROD cases had numerous significant histological differences, but relatively few significant clinical differences, from non-IgG4-ROD cases. Compared with the comprehensive diagnostic criteria, the consensus diagnostic criteria identified a group of IgG4-ROD cases with a slightly higher ratio of IgG4+ to IgG+ (p=0.01) and a slightly longer duration of symptoms (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest review of IgG4 staining among biopsy-confirmed IOI and OBLH. IgG4-ROD accounted for a substantial proportion of OBLH. The prevalence among cases of IOI was considerably reduced when the consensus diagnostic criteria were used in place of the comprehensive diagnostic criteria. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.