SLEDAI-2000与BILAG-2004两种评分系统评估狼疮性肾炎患儿肾脏活动度的可行性研究

摘要
图/表
参考文献(21)
相关文章 (15)
点击分布统计
下载分布统计

全文: PDF (957 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS) 背景资料

摘要目的：分析系统性红斑狼疮疾病活动指数2000（SLEDAI-2000）和英国狼疮评估组2004（BILAG-2004）两种评分系统在评估狼疮性肾炎（LN）患儿肾脏病变活动度方面的可行性。方法：收集159例系统性红斑狼疮（SLE）合并LN患儿的临床资料，应用 BILAG-2004和 SLEDAI-2000两种临床评分系统判断其临床疾病活动度。进行两种评分与24 h尿蛋白定量、病理指数的相关分析。用ROC曲线对两种评分系统进行评价。结果：24 h尿蛋白定量分级以中量蛋白尿居多（31.5%），病理类型以弥漫性LN(Ⅳ型)最多，占46.0％；24 h尿蛋白定量与两种评分均呈正相关（r值分别为0.36和0.39，均P＜0.05）；LN患者Ⅰ～Ⅳ型的活动指数（AI）值与SLEDAI-2000评分均呈正相关(r值分别为0.86、0.88、0.84和0.77，均P＜0.05)，与BILAG-2004评分亦均呈正相关（r值分别为0.88、0.98、0.86和0.89，均P＜0.05）；SLEDAI-2000评分与Ⅱ型LN患者AI评分相关性最好，其次为Ⅰ型；BILAG-2004评分与Ⅱ型LN患者AI评分相关性最好，其次为Ⅳ型；BILAG-2004评分系统的曲线下面积（AUC）为0.93，SLEDAI-2000 AUC为0.88。结论：BILAG-2004和SLEDAI-2000评分系统均可以评估LN患者的肾脏病变活动度。BILAG-2004评分系统结果更加可靠，更加全面。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	周洁清
	姜红

关键词 ：狼疮性肾炎, BILAG-2004评分系统, SLEDAI-2000评分系统, 儿童

Abstract：OBJECTIVE: To study feasibility of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2000) and British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 (BILAG-2004) scoring systems for assessing renal disease activity in children with lupus nephritis (LN). METHODS: The clinical data of 159 children with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and LN were collected, and disease activity was assessed by SLEDAI-2000 and BILAG-2004 scoring systems. The correlations between SLEDAI-2000 and BILAG-2004 scores and 24-hour urinary protein excretion and renal pathology index were analyzed. The SLEDAI-2000 and BILAG-2004 scoring systems were evaluated using ROC curve. RESULTS: Approximately one third (31.5%) of the 159 children had a moderate level of 24-hour urinary protein excretion. Among the 37 patients undergoing renal biopsy, 46.0% had diffuse LN (type Ⅳ). 24-hour urinary protein excretion was positively correlated with both SLEDAI-2000 (r=0.36, P<0.05) and BILAG-2004 scores (r= 0.39, P<0.05). Children with types Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, and Ⅳ LN had pathology activity index (AI) which positively correlated with SLEDAI-2000 scores (r=0.86, 0.88, 0.84, 0.77 respectively; P<0.05) and BILAG-2004 scores (r= 0.88, 0.98, 0.86, 0.89 respectively; P<0.05). SLEDAI-2000 score showed the best correlation with AI in patients with type Ⅱ LN, followed by those with type Ⅰ LN. BIILAG-2004 score showed the best correlation with AI in patients with type Ⅱ LN, followed by those with type Ⅳ LN. The BILAG-2004 scoring system had an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.93, and the SLEDAI-2000 scoring system had an AUC of 0.88. CONCLUSIONS: BILAG-2004 and SLEDAI-2000 scoring systems can be used to assess renal disease activity of patients with LN. The BILAG-2004 scoring system can provide more reliable and comprehensive assessment.

Key words： Lupus nephritis BILAG-2004 scoring system SLEDAI-2000 scoring system Child

PACS:

R593.24+1

引用本文:

周洁清,姜红. SLEDAI-2000与BILAG-2004两种评分系统评估狼疮性肾炎患儿肾脏活动度的可行性研究[J]. 中国当代儿科杂志, 2012, 14(10): 775-779.

ZHOU Jie-Qing,JIANG Hong. Feasibility of SLEDAI-2000 and BILAG-2004 scoring systems for assessing renal disease activity in children with lupus nephritis[J]. CJCP, 2012, 14(10): 775-779.

链接本文:

http://www.zgddek.com/CN/ 或 http://www.zgddek.com/CN/Y2012/V14/I10/775

	［1］Brunner HI, Gladman DD, Ibaoez D, Urowitz MD, Silverman ED. Difference in disease features between childhood-onset and adult-onset systemic lupus erythematosus［J］. Arthritis Rheum, 2008, 58(2): 556-562.
	［2］Tucker LB, Uribe AG, Fernández M, Vilá LM, McGwin G, Apte M, et al. Adolescent onset of lupus results in more aggressive disease and worse outcomes: results of a nested matched case-control study with in LUMINA, a multiethnic US cohort (LUMINA LVII)［J］. Lupus,2008, 17(4): 314-322.
	［3］王建新，刘思赵，叶任高.儿童狼疮性肾炎76例临床特点分析［J］. 中国当代儿科杂志,2002,4(11):73-74.
	［4］中华医学会风湿病学分会.系统性红斑狼疮诊断及治疗指南［J］.中华风湿病学杂志, 2010,14(5): 342-346.
	［5］易著文.儿童常见肾脏疾病诊治循证指南(试行)解读(六):狼疮性肾炎诊断治疗［J］.中华儿科杂志,2010,48(9):695-697.
	［6］Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, Prabu A, Sokoll K, Teh LS, et al. Revised British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index: a reliable tool for assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus activity［J］. Arthritis Rheum, 2006, 54(10): 3300-3305.
	［7］Isenberg DA, Rahman A, Allen E, Farewell V, Akil M, Bruce IN, et al. BILAG 2004. Development and initial validation of an updated version of the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group′s disease activity index for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus［J］. Rheumatology(Oxford), 2005, 44(7): 902-906.
	［8］Ehrenstein MR, Conroy SE, Heath J, Latchman DS, Isenberg DA.The occurrence, nature and distribution of flares in a cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a rheumatological view［J］. Br J Rheumatol, 1995, 34(3): 257-260.
	［9］Giadman DD, lbanez D, Urowitz MB.Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index 2000［J］. J Rheumatol, 2002, 29(2): 288-291.
	［10］Gladman DD, Urowitz MB, Kagal A, Hallett D. Accurately describing changes in disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus［J］. J Rheumatol, 2000, 27(2): 377-379.
	［11］Weening JJ, D′Agati VD, Schwartz MM, Seshan SV, Alpers CE, Appel GB, et al. The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited［J］. Kidney Int, 2004, 65(2): 521-530.
	［12］Strutz F, Muller GA. On the progression of chronic renal disease［J］. Nephron, 1995, 69(4): 371-379.
	［13］Hill GS, Delahousse M, Nochy D, Tomkiewicz E, Rémy P, Mignon F, et al. A new morphologic index for the evaluation of renal biopsies in lupus nephritis［J］. Kidney Int, 2000, 58(3): 1160-1173.
	［14］Ruggenenti P, Perna A, Remuzzi G; GISEN Group Investigators. Retarding progression of chronic renal disease: the neglected issue of residual proteinuria［J］.Kidney Int, 2003, 63(6): 2254-2261.
	［15］D′Amico G, Bazzi C. Pathophysiology of proteinuria［J］. Kidney Int, 2003, 63(3): 809-825.
	［16］Tencer J, Bakoush O, Torffvit O. Diagnostic and prognostic significance of proteinuria selectivity index in glomerular diseases［J］. Clin Chim Acta, 2000, 297(1-2): 73-83.
	［17］Korbet SM, Lewis EJ, Schwartz MM, Reichlin M, Evans J, Rohde RD. Factors predictive of outcome in severe lupus nephritis. Lupus Nephritis Collaborative Study Group ［J］.Am J Kidney Dis, 2000, 35(5): 904-914,
	［18］全国儿童风湿病协作组.儿童风湿病诊断及治疗专家共识（二）［J］.临床儿科杂志,2010, 28 (11) :1089-1094
	［19］Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, Rahman A, Teh LS, Griffiths B, et al. British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index is valid for assessment of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus［J］. Arthritis Rheum, 2007, 56(12): 4113-4119.
	［20］Yee CS, Cresswell L, Farewell V, Rahman A, Teh LS, Griffiths B, et al. Numerical scoring for the BILAG-2004 index［J］. Rheumatology(Oxford), 2010, 49(9): 1665-1669.
	［21］Yee CS, Farewell V, Isenberg DA, Griffiths B, Teh LS, Bruce IN, et al. The BILAG-2004 index is sensitive to change for assessment of SLE disease activity［J］. Rheumatology(Oxford), 2009, 48(6): 691-695.