Xuan Qi1, Chao Sun1, Yu Tian1, Yuxiang Han1, Chenxing Peng1, Hongtao Jin1, Lixia Gao1, Huifang Guo2. 1. Department of Rheumatism and immunology, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 050000, China. 2. Department of Rheumatism and immunology, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 050000, China. Electronic address: guohuifang0601@hotmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We attempted to evaluate the diagnostic value of different salivary gland ultrasonography (SGUS) scoring systems for primary sjögren's syndrome (pSS). METHODS: Total 134 patients with pSS and 109 non-SS sicca controls were included in our study. All the cases were evaluated by four scoring systems (such as 0-16 SGUS, 0-3 SGUS, Parotid glands and Submandibular salivary glands scoring system). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed for the four scoring systems. RESULTS: The mean scores of pSS patients were significantly higher than that of controls by four scoring systems (P<0.01). The AUC (area under the curve) of (0-16) SGUS scoring system (0.916) was higher than Submandibular salivary glands scoring system (0.885) (P=0.016). No significant difference of AUC was observed in (0-3) SGUS scoring system, compared with 0-16, parotid gland and submandibular salivary glands scoring system. The optimal cutoff value of (0-16) SGUS, (0-3) SGUS, Parotid gland, Submandibular salivary glands scoring system was 5, 2, 3, 2, respectively. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity and specificity of the four scoring systems. CONCLUSION: The simplified parotid gland scoring system may be the simplified and feasible method for pSS diagnosis.
PURPOSE: We attempted to evaluate the diagnostic value of different salivary gland ultrasonography (SGUS) scoring systems for primary sjögren's syndrome (pSS). METHODS: Total 134 patients with pSS and 109 non-SS sicca controls were included in our study. All the cases were evaluated by four scoring systems (such as 0-16 SGUS, 0-3 SGUS, Parotid glands and Submandibular salivary glands scoring system). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed for the four scoring systems. RESULTS: The mean scores of pSS patients were significantly higher than that of controls by four scoring systems (P<0.01). The AUC (area under the curve) of (0-16) SGUS scoring system (0.916) was higher than Submandibular salivary glands scoring system (0.885) (P=0.016). No significant difference of AUC was observed in (0-3) SGUS scoring system, compared with 0-16, parotid gland and submandibular salivary glands scoring system. The optimal cutoff value of (0-16) SGUS, (0-3) SGUS, Parotid gland, Submandibular salivary glands scoring system was 5, 2, 3, 2, respectively. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity and specificity of the four scoring systems. CONCLUSION: The simplified parotid gland scoring system may be the simplified and feasible method for pSS diagnosis.
Authors: Agata Sebastian; Patryk Woytala; Marta Madej; Krzysztof Proc; Katarzyna Czesak-Woytala; Maciej Sebastian; Krzysztof Zub; Piotr Wiland Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 2.631