What question did this study set out to answer?

May 26, 2006Arthritis & Rheumatism

Diagnostic accuracy of subcutaneous abdominal fat tissue aspiration for detecting systemic amyloidosis and its utility in clinical practice

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

IGIngrid I. van GamerenUniversity Medical Center Groningen BHBouke P. C. HazenbergUniversity Medical Center Groningen JBJohan BijzetUniversity Medical Center Groningen

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Diagnostic study reveals high sensitivity and specificity for abdominal fat aspiration in systemic amyloidosis, indicating limited necessity for subsequent rectal biopsy.

Key Points

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of subcutaneous abdominal fat tissue aspiration for detecting systemic amyloidosis and evaluate its utility in routine clinical practice.
Evaluated consecutive patients with established systemic amyloidosis (N=120: 38 AA, 70 AL, 12 ATTR) and clinically suspected systemic amyloidosis (N=162), alongside 45 control subjects, at a tertiary referral hospital between 1994 and 2004.
Assessed Congo red-stained aspirates using a routine quick method (single smear, single observer) and a thorough method (three smears, two independent observers), comparing findings to biopsies of other tissues, including the rectum.
In established systemic amyloidosis, routine assessment achieved a sensitivity of 80% (95% CI 72–87%), which increased to 93% (95% CI 87–97%) with thorough assessment, while specificity in controls was 100% (95% CI 92–100%).
Among 162 patients with suspected amyloidosis, 69 (43%) received a confirmed diagnosis, with fat tissue aspiration testing positive in 66 of those patients (96%).
Subcutaneous fat aspiration demonstrated superior clinical utility compared with rectal biopsy, with negligible diagnostic yield added by subsequent rectal biopsy following a negative fat aspirate.

Cite This Study

Gameren et al. (2006) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fe79d2d8476229fea35a48 https://doi.org/10.1002/art.21902

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

May 26, 2006Arthritis & Rheumatism

Diagnostic accuracy of subcutaneous abdominal fat tissue aspiration for detecting systemic amyloidosis and its utility in clinical practice

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

IGIngrid I. van GamerenUniversity Medical Center Groningen BHBouke P. C. HazenbergUniversity Medical Center Groningen JBJohan BijzetUniversity Medical Center Groningen

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Diagnostic study reveals high sensitivity and specificity for abdominal fat aspiration in systemic amyloidosis, indicating limited necessity for subsequent rectal biopsy.

Key Points

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of subcutaneous abdominal fat tissue aspiration for detecting systemic amyloidosis and evaluate its utility in routine clinical practice.
Evaluated consecutive patients with established systemic amyloidosis (N=120: 38 AA, 70 AL, 12 ATTR) and clinically suspected systemic amyloidosis (N=162), alongside 45 control subjects, at a tertiary referral hospital between 1994 and 2004.
Assessed Congo red-stained aspirates using a routine quick method (single smear, single observer) and a thorough method (three smears, two independent observers), comparing findings to biopsies of other tissues, including the rectum.
In established systemic amyloidosis, routine assessment achieved a sensitivity of 80% (95% CI 72–87%), which increased to 93% (95% CI 87–97%) with thorough assessment, while specificity in controls was 100% (95% CI 92–100%).
Among 162 patients with suspected amyloidosis, 69 (43%) received a confirmed diagnosis, with fat tissue aspiration testing positive in 66 of those patients (96%).
Subcutaneous fat aspiration demonstrated superior clinical utility compared with rectal biopsy, with negligible diagnostic yield added by subsequent rectal biopsy following a negative fat aspirate.

Cite This Study

Gameren et al. (2006) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fe79d2d8476229fea35a48 https://doi.org/10.1002/art.21902

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark