Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

Journal of Autoimmune Diseases

Open Access

Are classification criteria for vasculitis useful in clinical practice? Observations and lessons from Colombia

  • Paúl Alejandro Méndez Patarroyo1,
  • José Félix Restrepo2,
  • Samanda Adriana Rojas1,
  • Federico Rondón3,
  • Eric L Matteson4Email author and
  • Antonio Iglesias-Gamarra5
Journal of Autoimmune Diseases20096:1

https://doi.org/10.1186/1740-2557-6-1

Received: 27 March 2008

Accepted: 27 February 2009

Published: 27 February 2009

Abstract

Introduction

Idiopathic systemic vasculitis represents a group of clinical entities having non-specific etiology with the common characteristic of acute or chronic inflammatory compromise of the small and large vessels walls, associated with fibrinoid necrosis.

Objectives

To describe the most common inflammatory vascular diseases in a long historical cohort of patients from San Juan de Dios Hospital located in Bogota, Colombia using two different systems and a clinical histopathological correlation format, and to make a comparison between them.

Methods

We reviewed all previously ascertained cases of vasculitis confirmed by biopsy processed between 1953 and 1990, and systematically collected data on all new cases of vasculitis from 1991 to 1997 at the Hospital San Juan de Dios (Bogota – Colombia). The cases were classified in accordance with the Chapel Hill Consensus criteria, and the system proposed by J.T. Lie.

Results

Of 165,556 biopsy tissue specimens obtained during this period from our hospital, 0.18% had vasculitis, perivasculitis or vasculopathy. These included 304 histopathological biopsies from 292 patients. Cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis (64 histological specimens) was the most frequently encountered type of "primary" vasculitis followed by thromboangiitis obliterans (38 specimens), and polyarteritis nodosa (24 specimens). Vasculitis associated with connective tissue diseases (33 specimens) and infection (20 specimens) were the main forms of secondary vasculitis, a category that was omitted from the Chapel Hill consensus report. We found that 65.8% of our histopathological diagnoses could not be classified according to the Chapel Hill classification, and 35.2% could not be classified according to the classification of Lie. Only 8.9% of cases remained unclassified by our system after clinical and histological correlation.

Conclusion

Current vasculitis classification schemes are designed for classification, rather that diagnosis of disease and do not adequately address some common forms of inflammatory vascular diseases, including those of infectious etiology and unusual etiology seen in clinical practice. Based on our clinical experience, we suggest a classification outline which practitioners can use which emphasizes correlation of the clinical picture to the histopathology findings for diagnosis and therapy, which may promote better clinical practice and standardization for clinical trials.

Introduction

Systemic vasculitis represents a heterogeneous group of clinical entities having non-specific etiology with the common characteristic of acute or chronic inflammatory compromise of the small and large vessels walls, associated with fibrinoid necrosis. Histopathological examination is the main basis for diagnosing these diseases. Vasculitis may be primary, or associated with another diseases process. Infections, hypersensibility to drugs, atrial myxoma, solid cancers, and lymphoproliferative or other connective tissue diseases are among the entities causing secondary vasculitis [117].

Criteria have been defined for classifying the different types of vasculitis by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Vasculitis Study Committee, which however limited itself to defining "primary" vasculitis characteristics. The ACR introduced criteria for some vasculitides in 1990, and has proposed different parameters for classifying each one of these entities [1826]. Only seven types of vasculitis are considered in the ACR scheme. These and the classification system proposed by J. T. Lie [27] and by Chapel Hill consensus conference [28] in 1994 are in use today. These criteria are not designed for diagnosis of vasculitis, and are inadequate for clinical application, and omit important clinical forms of vasculitis.

With few exceptions, only sporadic reports of vasculitis are found in Latin-American literature [2956]. Some of the larger series include classification studies of Alarcón-Segovia [5759] and one cohort of patients with primary vasculitis of the Cisterna's group in Chile [60]. The epidemiology of the primary vasculitides is best studied in Europe and North America [6172]. There have been no such studies in South America.

With this study, we describe the different types of vasculitis most frequently found in the San Juan de Dios' Hospital from Bogotá, Colombia using two current classification systems as well as our own clinical-pathological correlation.

Methods

This is a descriptive study performed in two phases. All 165,556 histological specimens (129,192 between 1953 and 1990 and 36,364 between 1991 and 1997) processed in the Universidad Nacional de Colombia's Pathology Department (Bogotá, Colombia) were compiled. The data from the 1953–1990 cases were obtained from medical record review of all patients with a positive biopsy specimen. After 1990, cases were compiled using a standard case report form (CRF) as patients attended consultation in the clinical setting. All reports from each examination were reviewed and all those with vascular inflammatory compromise collected; 304 confirmed cases of vasculitis were found (187 between 1953 and 1990, and 117 between 1991 and 1997). These included 187 specimens from the 1953–1990 period and 117 from 1991–1997. These specimens were reviewed by rheumatologists and by members of the pathology department of a third level university hospital from Bogotá, Colombia (Hospital San Juan de Dios).

Results were expressed in frequencies since the total number of patients that consulted during these years was not available, so that an approximate calculation of incidence could not be performed. Of 165,556 biopsies processed by the histopathology laboratory of our hospital, 304 specimens from 292 patients had evidence of vascular inflammatory involvement. Once a diagnosis was made on histopathological grounds, the cases were classified according to the Chapel Hill [28] and J. T. Lie classification proposal [27]. The criteria defined by the ACR [1826] for classifying primary vasculitis were also applied, however these encompass only 7 types of vasculitis, and it was necessary to expand the spectrum of vasculitis entities according to clinical, laboratory, and histological considerations. All histological studies were re-reviewed and diagnosed according to clinical, laboratory and histopathological information.

Results

Of the 165,556 tissue specimens, 0.18 percent could be assigned a diagnosis of vasculitis, perivasculitis or vasculopathy (Tables 1 and 2). Three-hundred-four histopathological biopsies from 292 patients with documented vasculitis were found during that period. More than one sample was obtained from twelve patients, those with two histological specimens were: six with Buerger's disease (in one of these the diagnosis on first biopsy was not conclusive); two patients with polyarteritis nodosa (in both the initial diagnosis was inconclusive); two patients with inconclusive results of histology, including one diagnosed with cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis and the other with connective tissue disease vasculitis.
Table 1

Classification of histological specimens with vasculitis from the San Juan de Dios Hospital, Bogotá, Colombia, 1953 – 1997, according to the Chapel Hill system [28]

Vasculitis diagnosis

Number

N = 304

Frequencies

per 100,000 histological specimens

Percentages

   

groups of vasculitis

subgroups of vasculitis

I. Primary vasculitis

104

62.8

34.2

 

   A. Large vessel vasculitis

1

0.6

 

1

1. Giant cell (Temporal) arteritis

1

0.6

  

   B. Medium sized vessel vasculitis

24

14.5

 

23.1

1. Polyarteritis nodosa

24

14.5

  

   C. Small vessel vasculitis

79

47.7

 

75.9

1. Wegener's granulomatosis

3

1.8

  

2. Churg-Strauss syndrome

2

1.2

  

3. Microscopic polyangiitis

1

0.6

  

4. Henoch-Schönlein purpura

9

5.4

  

5. Cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis

64

38.7

  

II. Not classified vasculitis

200

120.8

65.8

 

Total

304

183.6

100

 
Table 2

Classification of histological specimens with vasculitis from the San Juan de Dios Hospital, Bogotá, Colombia, 1953 – 1997, according to the scheme of Lie [27]

Vasculitis diagnosis

Number

N = 304

Frequencies

per 100,000 histological specimens

Percentages

   

groups of vasculitis

subgroups of vasculitis

I. Primary vasculitis

142

74

46.7

 

   A. Affecting large, medium and small sized blood vessels

1

0.6

 

0.7

1. Giant cell (Temporal) arteritis

1

0.6

  

   B. Affecting predominantly medium and small-sized blood vessels

29

17.5

 

20.4

1. Polyarteritis nodosa

24

14.5

  

2. Churg-Strauss syndrome

2

1.2

  

3. Wegener's granulomatosis

3

1.8

  

   C. Affecting predominantly small-sized blood vessels

74

44.7

 

52.1

1. Microscopic polyangiitis

1

0.6

  

2. Henoch-Schönlein purpura

9

5.4

  

3. Cutaneous leukocytoclastic angiitis

64

38.7

  

   D. Miscellaneous conditions

38

23

 

26.8

1. Buerger's disease

38

23

  

II. Secondary vasculitides

55

33.2

18.1

 

1. Infection-related vasculitis

20

12.1

  

2. Connective tissue disease vasculitis

33

20

  

3. Hypocomplementemic urticarial vasculitis

1

0.6

  

4. Vasculitis associated with neoplasia

1

0.6

  

III. Unclassified vasculitis

107

64.6

35.2

 

Total

304

183.6

100

 

The average age of the patients from whom these specimens were obtained was 36 years, ranging from 10 to 99. Male/female ratio was 1:2. Most specimens corresponding to vasculitis came from skin (64.5%), amputated extremities (11.5%) and muscle (8.2%).

Primary vasculitis was the diagnosis in the minority of our biopsies; thirty-four percent (104 specimens) of the histopathological studies corresponded to primary vasculitis according to the Chapel Hill Consensus Conference while forty-six percent (142 specimens) revealed a primary vasculitis according to the system of J. T. Lie (Tables 1 and 2).

The most frequently encountered types of primary vasculitis were cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis (64 specimens), followed by thromboangiitis obliterans (38 specimens) (all of this obtained from tissue of amputated extremities), polyarteritis nodosa (24 specimens), and Henoch-Schönlein purpura (Tables 1, 2, 3).
Table 3

Histological specimens with vasculitis from the San Juan de Dios Hospital, Bogotá, Colombia, 1953 – 1997, according to a clinical-pathological correlation of vasculitis [92]

Vasculitis diagnosis

Number

N = 304

Frequencies

per 100,000 histological specimens

Percentages

   

groups of vasculitis

subgroups of vasculitis

1. Leukocytoclastic vasculitis

107

64.6

35.2

 

   1.1. Erythema elevatum diutinum

1

0.6

 

0.9

   1.2. Secondary to diseases

42

25.4

 

39.3

1.2.1. SLE

14

8.5

  

1.2.2. PM/DM

14

8.5

  

1.2.3. Diffuse/limited scleroderma

5

6.7

  

1.2.4. Henoch-Schönlein purpura

9

5.4

  

   1.3 Livedoid leukocytoclastic vasculitis

5

3

 

4.7

   1.4. Idiopathic

59

35.6

 

55.1

2. Lymphomonocitic's vasculitis

53

32

17.4

 

   2.1. Schamberg's purpura

1

0,6

 

1.9

   2.2. Chronic urticaria, associated

1

0.6

 

1.9

   2.3. Idiopathic

51

30.8

 

96.2

3. Nodular vasculitis

19

11.5

3.6

 

   3.1. Erythema nodosum

7

4.2

 

36.8

   3.2. Granulomatous panniculitis

2

1.2

 

10.5

   3.3. Vasculitis in panniculitis

4

2.4

 

21.1

   3.4. Idiopathic

6

3.6

 

31.6

4. Granulomatous vasculitis

11

6.6

3.6

 

   4.1. Wegener's granulomatosis

3

1.8

 

27.3

   4.2. Churg Strauss

2

1.2

 

18.2

   4.3. Lymphomatoid granulomatosis (lung)

1

0.6

 

9.1

   4.4. Granuloma annulare

1

0.6

 

9.1

   4.5. Giant cell (Temporal) arteritis

1

0.6

 

9.1

   4.6. Idiopathic

3

1.8

 

27.3

5. Polyarteritis nodosa

24

14.5

7.9

 

   5.1. Generalized

16

4.8

 

66.7

   5.2. Cutaneous

8

9.7

 

33.3

6. Vasculitis like diseases

4

2.4

1.3

 

   6.1. Arterio-embolism

4

2.4

 

100

7. Infection-related vasculitis

20

12.1

6.6

 

   7.1. Mycobacterium

12

7.2

 

60

   7.2. Bacterial infections

8

4.8

 

40

8. Microscopic polyangiitis

1

0.6

0.3

 

9. Thromboangiitis obliterans

38

23

12.5

 

10. Unclassified vasculitis

27

16.3

8.9

 

TOTAL

304

 

100

 

Vasculitis associated with connective tissue diseases (33 specimens) was the most frequently encountered classification among those specimens classified as secondary vasculitis according to the scheme proposed by J.T. Lie, while vasculitis associated with infection was the next most common type (20 specimens; Tables 2 and 3).

In our format of clinical-pathological correlation we found that leukocytoclastic vasculitis was the most frequent with 107 specimens, followed by lymphomonocytic vasculitis with 53 specimens. Only 27 specimens (8.9%) could not be classified with our or any scheme. Within the cases that were unable to be classified using the system of JT Lie or the Chapel Hill proposal are the lymphomonocytic vasculitis (53 specimens), several cases of granulomatous vasculitis, nodular vasculitis (19 specimens) and illnesses that resemble vasculitis, including arterial embolism (4 specimens) (Table 3).

Discussion

Vasculitis classification are diverse and employ several organizing principles including the size of the compromised vessel, whether an underlying pathoetiology is found (primary versus secondary vasculitis); the main type of vessel compromise (artery, vein, capillary, etc.), the type of immune damage and others.

Attempts to classify vasculitis began with the work of Pearl Zeek in 1952 [61] and many others have proposed their own classification schemes [27, 28, 5759, 6291]. Considerations of the ACR [78], Lie [27, 7981], Churg [83, 84], and others were taken into account during development of the Chapel Hill consensus conference criteria [28, 91].

Zeek's concept of classifying vasculitis according to the size of the comprised vessel: small, medium-or large-sized continues to be widely used. This proposal, along with other proposals regarding vessel size, has been adapted by many authors who have since built upon it.

Existing classification systems are incomplete and difficult to use in the clinic, as they are not designed to be diagnostic criteria, but rather are more useful in distinguishing one type of vasculitis from another in populations of patients for whom a diagnosis of vasculitis is established [92]. For this reason, in 1993 we proposed a format for ordering vasculitides based on their pathogenesis, histologic features, and causal agents if known, with the intent of improving understanding of them without proposing a new classification scheme (Table 3). We consequently included numerous entities with defined histology which are not captured in existing classification schemes [93]. This provides a clinical-pathologic correlation which goes beyond the incomplete current classification schemes [93].

It is our opinion that the most representative, recognized and utilized classifications in worldwide literature are those of J.T. Lie, and Jennette and Falk et al., described at the Chapel Hill Consensus Conference. We therefore analyzed this Colombian cohort in accordance with these two classification schemes and compared them with our findings based on clinical-pathological correlation.

In our experience, "primary" vasculitis seems to be uncommon in Colombia [41], although it does occur, including Takayasu's disease [42, 92]. Since our review concentrates on cases with biopsy evidence of disease, the true frequency of primary vasculitis diagnosed on clinical, but not histological grounds, is certainly higher. Furthermore, we observed that a significant number of our cases could not be classified by Lie's and the Chapel Hill Consensus criteria (Table 3, 4). We also encountered difficulties in assigning a diagnosis of vasculitis to some of our histological studies according to whether they were primary or secondary. Many difficulties emerged while evaluating these cases. It was particularly difficult to make a diagnosis based on the ACR diagnostic criteria of classic types, since these were created for classifying patients having defined vasculitis and not for making a specific or even general diagnosis in patients where other vasculitis or vasculopathies are suspected.
Table 4

Comparison of Two Vasculitis Classifications Schemes With a Clinical-Pathological Correlation from the San Juan de Dios hospital, Bogotá, Colombia, 1953 – 1997 *

 

Percentages

 

Chapel Hill

Lie

Clinical-pathological Correlation

Classifiable

34.2

64.8

92.1

Unclassifiable

65.8

35.2

8.9

* from 304 histological specimens with inflammatory vascular compromise

The difficulty in applying these criteria clinically was illustrated in a study using chart audits to classify 198 consecutive patients by ACR criteria, with re-audit of patient charts after 2–8 months to ascertain the patient's ultimate diagnosis, Rao et al, found that vasculitis was diagnosed in 51 (26%) patients. Thirty-eight (75%) of 51 patients with vasculitis and 31 (21%) of 147 patients without vasculitis met ACR criteria for one or more types of vasculitis. The positive predictive values for the four vasculitides according to ACR criteria were 17% to 29% for the entire cohort and 29% to 75% for only the patients with a final diagnosis of vasculitis [94]. It was also difficult to obtain samples in cases where visceral compromise or large vessel involvement was present, although clearly the histopathologic examination continues to be the gold-standard for diagnosis.

We have pioneered the study of vasculitis in Colombia. The San Juan de Dios Hospital was the Colombian reference center for this type of pathology during the time of this study, and our reports may reflect the state of these entities in Colombia and perhaps reveal Latin-American trends in frequency of the different types of vasculitis occurring. Small-sized vessel vasculitis is the predominant type of primary vasculitis.

In the Latin American literature most reports of vasculitis are those of idiopathic types. Takayasu's arteritis in Brazil has been reported by Sato et al's group [43], and Behçet's disease by Heyman et al and Ferraz et al [44, 46]. Kawasaki's disease has been reported by Saraiva et al [45], and Lucio's phenomenon has been reported by Souza et al [38]. Cisternas et al evaluated described their patient cohort of "primary" vasculitis in Chile [60]. Other work groups in Mexico have made significant contributions to the study of vasculitis, especially that of Alarcón-Segovia. The immuno-pathological aspects of Takayasu's arteritis have been reported on by Vargas-Alarcon [48]. Other studies include cases of Takayasu's arteritis by Castro, Castanon, and Robles [49, 53, 56]. Henoch-Schönlein purpura has been reported by Reyes-Vasquez [50], Kawasaki's diseases in children by Vizcaino-Alarcon [52], and Behçet's disease by Alarcon-Segovia's [55]. In Peru, Sanchez et al [95] described 29 patients with microscopic polyangiitis and compared them with those of Guillevin's group [96]. The Peruvian patients had more multiple mononeuritis, less cutaneous involvement, more benign renal disease, and a better prognosis. There are no studies of vasculitis epidemiology in Latin American.

Cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis predominated in our study of primary vasculitis correlating with other studies reporting this as being the most frequent type.

Thromboangiitis obliterans was more frequent before 1990 (26 specimens), probably because the national health promotion effort from the 1980s onward against tobacco-use could account for its diminishing frequency since then. The difference found in primary vasculitis between the two proposed classifications is explained largely by the absence of Buerger's disease in the Chapel Hill scheme. Thromboangiitis obliterans (Buerger's disease) is included as a vasculitis, understanding that it is histopathologically distinguished from other forms of vasculitis, having an inflammatory thrombus with relatively sparse evidence of inflammation in the vessel wall.

Our study found JT Lie's classification was better adapted to those pathologies associated with vasculitis in our institution compared to that of the Chapel Hill Consensus Conference (Table 4). This may be due to the consensus excluding secondary vasculitis, such as those associated with connective tissue diseases, solid tumor, atrial myxoma, drug- or infection-related reactions, among others. A majority, 65.8%, of the analyzed specimens were not classified on applying Chapel Hill consensus criteria, while fewer remained unclassified using Lie's proposed criteria (35.2%). When we used a correlation based on clinical diagnosis with pathological findings, only 8,9% of the specimens were unable to be classified.

Histopathologic examination of biopsy specimens is the gold standard for studying vasculitis in spite of existing limitations. Currently used classifications leave many vascular entities, including some forms of vasculitis which are thus far ill-defined, without being classified. Knowledge concerning these entities is limited in Latin America, so efforts made in studying these diseases will benefit our patients. It is also necessary to make extra efforts towards creating more suitable classifications in which Latin-Americans and other countries study groups may participate.

It is likely that the ethnicity, immunogenetics, and the socioeconomic status of patients with vasculitis, among other factors, is different in our patients than in those described in North American and Western European cohorts and accounts for many of the clinical differences seen in these different groups of patients. Consequently, an attempt must be made to include the totality of conditions with clinical and histopathological findings of vasculitis and even vasculopathies mimicking or closely resembling established vasculitis conditions in such new classification schemes to facilitate clinical diagnosis and research.

Conclusion

Current classification criteria for vasculitis do not adequately address some common forms of inflammatory vascular diseases, including those of infectious etiology and unusual etiology seen in clinical practice. They are based primarily on the vessel size, rather than on histopathologic clinical correlation. There are about 20 forms of primary vasculitis, some of which are not included in the current classification schemes such as nodular vasculitis of the skin, as well as many forms of secondary vasculitis including those associated with neoplasia, infection, and medications, which are not included in current nosology.

The importance of establishing this correlation is illustrated by, for example, the finding of lymphomonocytic vasculitis which is typically associated with cutaneous vasculitis, often but not always related to infection, medication or collagen vascular disease, and typically has a good prognosis. The several forms of ANCA associated vasculitis have pleomorphic manifestations which demand a critical differentiated clinical approach. Based on our clinical experience, we suggest a classification outline which practitioners can use which emphasizes correlation of the clinical picture to the histopathology findings for diagnosis and therapy, which may promote better clinical practice and standardization for clinical trials.

A more complete understanding of these entities may provide a better basis for classifying them. Our study suggests that current classification schemes for vasculitis are incomplete [97]. They must be brought up to date [98], and must better reflect the diagnostic process used clinically. At present, physicians should use the current classification systems with the understanding that they are incomplete, and have limited value in clinical practice [99]. Meanwhile, we think that judicious analysis of cases of suspected vasculitis through clinical-pathological correlation will continue to be important in assessment of patients with these diseases.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Rheumatology Fellow, Department of Internal Medicine, Rheumatology Unit, Universidad Nacional de Colombia
(2)
Professor of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Rheumatology Unit, Chief of Rheumatology Unit, Universidad Nacional de Colombia
(3)
Assistant Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Rheumatology Unit, Universidad Nacional de Colombia
(4)
Professor of Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine
(5)
Professor of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Rheumatology Unit, Universidad Nacional de Colombia

References

  1. Mandell BF, Calabrese LH: Infections and systemic vasculitis. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 1998, 10: 51-7. 10.1097/00002281-199801000-00008.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Sneller MC: Vasculitis secondary to bacterial, fungal, and parasitic infection. Inflammatory Diseases of Blood Vessels. Edited by: Hoffman GS, Weyand CM. 2001, New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc, 599-608.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Virgin HW: Host and viral genes that control herpesvirus vasculitis. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002, 69 (Suppl 2): SII7-12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Naides SJ: Known causes of vasculitis in man. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002, 69 (Suppl 2): SII15-9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Tervaert JW: Infections in primary vasculitides. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002, 69 (Suppl 2): S24-6.Google Scholar
  6. Sneller MC, Langford CA, Fauci AS: The vasculits syndromes. Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine. 2005, McGraw-Hill Co, Chap 306: 2002-14. 16Google Scholar
  7. Herbst A, Padilla MT, Prasad AR, Morales MC, Copeland JG: Cardiac Wegener's granulomatosis masquerading as left atrial myxoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003, 75: 1321-3. 10.1016/S0003-4975(02)04662-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Macedo ME, Reis R, Sottomayor C, Nunes R, Candeias O, Gomes MR, et al: Systemic vasculitis as the initial presentation of a left atrial myxoma. Rev Port Cardiol. 1997, 16: 463-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Okada M, Suzuki K, Hidaka T, Shinohara T, Takada K, Nakajima M, et al: Polyarteritis associated with hypopharyngeal carcinoma. Intern Med. 2002, 41: 892-5. 10.2169/internalmedicine.41.892.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cengiz M, Altundag MK, Zorlu AF, Gullu IH, Ozyar E, Atahan IL: Malignancy in Behcet's disease: a report of 13 cases and a review of the literature. Clin Rheumatol. 2001, 20: 239-44. 10.1007/s100670170036.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Pertuiset E, Liote F, Launay-Russ E, Kemiche F, Cerf-Payrastre I, Chesneau AM: Adult Henoch-Schonlein purpura associated with malignancy. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2000, 29: 360-7. 10.1053/sarh.2000.6988.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Beji M, Khedher I, Ayadi N, Azouzi H, Hamza M: Periarteritis nodosa associated with lung cancer: a new observation. Tunis Med. 1999, 77: 585-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Garcia-Porrua C, Gonzalez-Gay MA, Afonso E, Perez De Llano L: Cutaneous vasculitis and solid tumors. Rev Rhum Engl Ed. 1999, 66: 185-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Varoczy L, Gergely L, Zeher M, Szegedi G, Illes A: Malignant lymphoma-associated autoimmune diseases: a descriptive epidemiological study. Rheumatol Int. 2002, 22: 233-7. 10.1007/s00296-002-0229-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Avina-Zubieta JA, Galindo-Rodriguez G, Lavalle C: Rheumatic manifestations of hematologic disorders. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 1998, 10: 86-90. 10.1097/00002281-199801000-00013.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Voskuyl AE, Hazes JM, Zwinderman AH, Paleolog EM, Meer van der FJ, Daha MR, Breedveld FC: Diagnostic strategy for the assessment of rheumatoid vasculitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003, 62: 407-13. 10.1136/ard.62.5.407.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Gupta A, Chandra N, Kler TS: Aortoarteritis with systemic lupus erythematosus and secondary antiphospholipid antibody syndrome: a rare association. Indian Heart J. 2002, 54: 301-3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Arend WP, Michel BA, Bloch DA, Hunder GG, Calabrese LH, Edworthy SM, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Takayasu arteritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1129-34. 10.1002/art.1780330302.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Bloch DA, Michel BA, Hunder GG, McShane DJ, Arend WP, Calabrese LH, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of vasculitis: patients and methods. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1068-73.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Calabrese LH, Michel BA, Bloch DA, Arend WP, Edworthy SM, Fauci AS, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of hypersensitivity vasculitis. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1108-13.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Fries JF, Hunder GG, Bloch DA, Michel BA, Arend WP, Calabrese LH, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of vasculitis. Summary. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1135-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hunder GG, Bloch DA, Michel BA, Stevens MB, Arend WP, Calabrese LH, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of giant cell arteritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1122-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Leavitt RY, Fauci AS, Bloch DA, Michel BA, Hunder GG, Arend WP, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Wegener's granulomatosis. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1101-107.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lightfoot RW, Michel BA, Bloch DA, Hunder GG, Zvaifler NJ, McShane DJ, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of polyarteritis nodosa. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1088-93.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Masi AT, Hunder GG, Lie JT, Michel BA, Bloch DA, Arend WP, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Churg Strauss syndrome (allergic granulomatosis and angiitis). Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1094-100.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mills JA, Michel BA, Bloch DA, Calabrese LH, Hunder GG, Arend WP, et al: The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Henoch-Schönlein purpura. Arthritis Rheum. 1990, 33: 1114-21. 10.1002/art.1780330521.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lie JT: Nomenclature and classification of vasculitis: plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. Arthritis Rheum. 1994, 37: 181-86. 10.1002/art.1780370205.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Jennette JC, Falk RJ, Andrassy K, Bacon PA, Churg J, Gross WL, et al: Nomenclature of systemic vasculitides: proposal of an international consensus conference. Arthritis Rheum. 1994, 37: 187-92. 10.1002/art.1780370206.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Ramos-e-Silva M, Carneiro SC: Cutaneous vasculitis in Latin America. Clin Dermatol. 1999, 17: 663-70. 10.1016/S0738-081X(99)00069-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Gallo Ruiz J, Vasquez de Bernal J: Behcet syndrome: apropos of a new case. Rev Med Panama. 1988, 13: 173-7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Pierre R, Sue-Ho R, Watson D: Kawasaki syndrome in Jamaica. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2000, 19: 539-43. 10.1097/00006454-200006000-00010.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. St John MA, Ishmael RG: Outcome of Kawasaki disease in Barbados. West Indian Med J. 1992, 41: 68-71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Borrego LC, Escobar AS, Averhoff Casamayor MC, Bosh NT, Sanchez VR, Escalona NT: Behcet's syndrome. Report of the first case in Cuba. Rev Cubana Estomatol. 1989, 26: 175-80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Patrick AL, Barton EN, Vincente JB: Kawasaki disease in an adult Trinidadian male. Trop Geogr Med. 1988, 40: 254-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Venkatesh S, Grell GA, Williams W, Barrow KO, Shah DJ, Char G, et al: Polyarteritis nodosa in Jamaicans. West Indian Med J. 1988, 37: 43-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Berg RA, Belani A, Belani CP: Vasculitis in a suspected AIDS patient. South Med J. 1986, 79: 914-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. St John MA, Ishmael RG: Kawasaki disease in Barbados. West Indian Med J. 1983, 32: 50-5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Souza CS, Roselino AM, Figueiredo F, Foss NT: Lucio's phenomenon: clinical and therapeutic aspects. Int J Lepr Other Mycobact Dis. 2000, 68: 417-25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Sato EI, Lima DN, Espirito Santo B, Hata F: Takayasu arteritis. Treatment and prognosis in a university center in Brazil. Int J Cardiol. 2000, 75 (Suppl 1): S163-6. 10.1016/S0167-5273(00)00197-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Salazar M, Varela A, Ramírez LA, Uribe O, Vásquez G, Egea E, et al: Association of HLA-DRB1*1602 and DRB1*1001 with Takayasu arteritis in Colombian mestizos as markers of Amerindian ancestry. Int J Cardiol. 2000, 75 (Suppl 1): S113-6. 10.1016/S0167-5273(00)00181-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Jimenez-Paredes CA, Canas-Dávila CA, Sánchez A, Restrepo JF, Pena M, Iglesias-Gamarra A: Buerger's disease at the 'San Juan De Dios' Hospital, Santa Fe De Bogota, Colombia. Int J Cardiol. 1998, 66 (Suppl 1): S267-72. 10.1016/S0167-5273(98)00178-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Canas CA, Jiménez CA, Ramírez LA, Uribe O, Tobon I, Torrenegra A, et al: Takayasu arteritis in Colombia. Int J Cardiol. 1998, 66 (Suppl 1): S73-9. 10.1016/S0167-5273(98)00153-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Sato EI, Hatta FS, Levy-Neto M, Fernandes S: Demographic, clinical, and angiographic data of patients with Takayasu arteritis in Brazil. Int J Cardiol. 1998, 66 (Suppl 1): S67-70. 10.1016/S0167-5273(98)00152-1. discussion S71View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Heyman RE, Ferraz MB, Goncalves CR, Atra E: Evaluation of the International Study Group for Behcet's Disease Criteria in Brazilian patients. Clin Rheumatol. 1995, 14: 526-30. 10.1007/BF02208149.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Saraiva LR, Brindeiro Filho D, Barros GS, de Franca NA, Pontes GA: Kawasaki disease in Pernambuco, Brazil. Considerations on a case seen in a general hospital. Arq Bras Cardiol. 1992, 58: 43-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Barra C, Belfort Junior R, Abreu MT, Kim MK, Martins MC, Petrilli AM: Behcet's disease in Brazil – a review of 49 cases with emphasis on ophthalmic manifestations. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 1991, 35: 339-46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Nosetto EO, Etcheverrigaray ME, Oliva GA, Gonzalez ET, Samus SA: Equine viral arteritis: detection of antibodies of horses in Argentina. Zentralbl Veterinarmed [B]. 1984, 31: 526-9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  48. Vargas-Alarcon G, Flores-Dominguez C, Hernandez-Pacheco G, Zuniga J, Gamboa R, Soto ME, et al: Immunogenetics and clinical aspects of Takayasu's arteritis patients in a Mexican Mestizo population. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2001, 19: 439-43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Robles M, Reyes PA: Takayasu's arteritis in Mexico: a clinical review of 44 consecutive cases. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 1994, 12: 381-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Reyes-Vazquez H, Almaraz-Navarro JJ, Magana-Garcia M, Matta JJ, Mallet A: Schonlein-Henoch purpura. A report of 55 cases. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex. 1993, 50: 96-101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. González-Galnares M, Urban-Vazquez H, Santamaria-Diaz H, Gorbea-Robles MC: Kawasaki disease in Mexico: an analysis of 13 cases. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex. 1991, 48: 409-16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Vizcaino-Alarcon A, Arevalo-Salas A, Rodriguez-Lopez AM, Sadowinski-Pine S: Kawasaki disease in Mexican children. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex. 1991, 48: 398-408.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Castanon MC, Reyes PA, Vazquez J, Sanchez Torres G: Nonspecific Onishi-Takayasu arteritis. Experience at the I. Chavez National Institute of Cardiology Arch Inst Cardiol Mex. 1990, 60: 519-20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Arellano J, Ojeda S, Vargas R, Zavala C, Santos D, Lopez A, et al: Histocompatibility antigens and acute vascular purpura. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex. 1990, 47: 620-3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Lavalle C, Alarcon-Segovia D, Del Giudice-Knipping JA, Fraga A: Association of Behcet's syndrome with HLA-B5 in the Mexican mestizo population. J Rheumatol. 1981, 8: 325-7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Castro G, Chavez-Peon C, Sanchez-Torres G, Reyes PA: HLA A and B antigens in Takayasu's arteritis. Rev Invest Clin. 1982, 34: 15-7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Alarcon-Segovia D, Brown AL: Classification and etiologic aspects of necrotizing angiitides: an analytic approach to a confused subject with a critical review of the evidence for hypersensitivity in polyarteritis nodosa. Mayo Clin Proc. 1964, 39: 205-22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Alarcon-Segovia D: The necrotizing vasculitides. A new pathogenic classification. Med Clin North Am. 1977, 61: 241-68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Alarcon-Segovia D: Classification of the necrotizing vasculitides in man. Clin Rheum Dis. 1980, 6: 223-31.Google Scholar
  60. Cisternas M, Wainstein E, Soto L, Marinovic MA, Vargas A, Sobrazo E: Clinical features of systemic vasculitis in Santiago, Chile: a ten-year study. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002, 69 (Suppl 2): S170-Google Scholar
  61. Zeek PM: Periarteritis nodosa: A clinical review. Am J Clin Pathol. 1952, 22: 777-90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Black RL: Polyarteritis nodosa. Postg Med. 1962, 31: 426-30.Google Scholar
  63. McCombs RP: Systemic "allergic" vasculitis: clinical and pathological relationships. JAMA. 1965, 194: 1059-64. 10.1001/jama.194.10.1059.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Rose GA: The natural history of polyarteritis. Br Med J. 1957, 2: 1148-52.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Copeman PWM, Ryan TJ: Angiitis. Part I. The problem of the classification of cutaneous angiitis with refertence to histopathology and pathogenesis. Br J Derm. 1970, 82 (Suppl 5): 2-14. 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1970.tb07983.x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  66. Shulman LE: Polyarteritis nodosa. Immunological Diseases. Edited by: Samter M. 1971, Boston. Little Brown Co, II: 1029-38. 2Google Scholar
  67. de Shazo RD: The spectrum of systemic vasculitis. A classification to aid diagnosis. Postg Med. 1975, 58: 78-82.Google Scholar
  68. Christian CL, Sergent JS: Vasculitis syndromes: Clinical and experimental models. Am J Med. 1976, 61: 385-92. 10.1016/0002-9343(76)90376-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Guillian JN: Cutaneous necrotizing vasculitis and related disorders. Ann Allergy. 1976, 37: 328-39.Google Scholar
  70. Paronetto F: Systemic nonsuppurative necrotizing angiitis. Textbook of immunopathology. Edited by: Miescher PA, Müller-Eberhard HJ. 1976, New York. Grune & Stratton, 1013-24. 2Google Scholar
  71. Hughes GRV: Polyarteritis Nodosa. Connective Tissue Diseases. Edited by: Hughes GRV. 1976, Oxford. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 177-96.Google Scholar
  72. Fauci AS: The spectrum of vasculitis. Clinical, pathologic, immunologic and therapeutic considerations. Ann Int Med. 1978, 89: 660-76.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Fan PT, Davis JA, Somer T, Kaplan L, Bluestone R: A clinical approach to systemic vasculitis. Sem Arthritis Rheum. 1980, 9: 248-304. 10.1016/0049-0172(80)90017-7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  74. Cupps TR, Fauci AS: Classification of the vasculitides. The vasculitides. Major problems in internal medicine. 1981, Philadelphia. WB Saunders Co, XXI: 1-5.Google Scholar
  75. Cupps TR, Fauci AS: The vasculitic syndromes. Advances in internal medicine. 1982, Chicago. Year Book Medical Pub. Inc, 27: 315-44.Google Scholar
  76. Parris T: Vasculitis. Manual of rheumatology and outpatient orthopedic disorders. Diagnosis and therapy. Edited by: Beary JF III, Christian CL, Sculco T. 1981, Little Brown, 273-84.Google Scholar
  77. McCluskey RT, Fienberg R: Vasculitis in primary vasculitides, granulomatoses and connective tissue disease. Hum Pathol. 1983, 14: 305-15. 10.1016/S0046-8177(83)80116-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Hunder GG, Lie JT: The vasculitides. Cardiovas Clin. 1983, 13: 261-91.Google Scholar
  79. Lie JT: The classification of vasculitis and reappraisal of allergic granulomatosis and angiitis (Churg Straus syndrome). Mt Sinai J Med. 1986, 53: 429-39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Lie JT: Classification and immunodiagnosis of vasculitis: A new solution or promises unfulfilled. J Rheumatol. 1988, 15: 728-32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Lie JT: Diagnostic histopathology of major systemic and pulmonary vasculitic syndromes. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 1990, 16: 269-92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Morrow J, Isenberg D: Overlap syndromes, undifferentiated diseases and vasculitis. Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease. Edited by: Morrow J, Isenberg D. 1987, Oxford. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 284-304.Google Scholar
  83. Churg J, Churg A: Idiopathic and secondary vasculitis: A review. Mod Pathol. 1989, 2: 144-60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Churg J: Nomenclature of vasculitic syndromes: A historical perspective. Am J Kidney Dis. 1991, 28 (2): 148-153.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  85. Conn DL, Hunder G: Vasculitic syndromes. Vasculitis and related disorders. Textbook of Rheumatology. Edited by: Kelly W, Harris E, Ruddy S, Sledge C. 1989, Philadelphia. WB Saunders, 1167-99.Google Scholar
  86. Waldherr M, Eberlein-Gonska M, Noronha IL: Histopathological differentiation of systemic necrotizing vasculitides. APMIS Suppl. 1990, 19: 17-28.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Garcia MGE: Las vasculitis. Generalidades. Lupus eritematoso sistemico y vasculitis. Venezuela. Edited by: Garcia MGE. 1991, Editorial de la universidad de Zulia, 167-73.Google Scholar
  88. Scott DG: Classification of vasculitis. Edited by: Maddison PJ, Isenberg DA, Woo P, Glass DN. 1993, Oxford. Oxford Textbook of Rheumatology. Oxford Medical Publications, 842-6.Google Scholar
  89. Scott DGI, Watts RA: Classification and epidemiology of systemic vasculitis. Br J Rheumatol. 1994, 33: 897-99. 10.1093/rheumatology/33.10.897.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Sneller MC, Fauci AS: Patogénesis of vasculitis syndromes. Med Clin North Am. 1997, 81: 211-30. 10.1016/S0025-7125(05)70512-5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  91. Jennette JC, Falk RJ: Small-vessel vasculitis. N Eng J Med. 1997, 337: 1512-23. 10.1056/NEJM199711203372106.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  92. Iglesias-Gamarra A, Salazar M, Egea E, Vásquez G, Valle R: Análisis histórico de las vasculitis, clasificación y propuesta para su entendimiento. Biomédica. 1993, 13: 32-54.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  93. Iglesias Gamarra A, Restrepo JF, Rondon F, Sanchez A, Rojas SA, Mendez PA: Vasculitis: are current classifications useful in clinical practice?. (Abstract) Cleve Clin J. 2002, 69 (S2): 171-Google Scholar
  94. Rao JK, Allen NB, Pincus T: Limitations of the 1990 American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria in the Diagnosis of Vasculitis. Ann Int Med. 1998, 129: 345-52.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Sánchez A, Alfaro J, Acevedo E, Cucho M, Pastor C, Perich , et al: Poliangeitis microscópica en pacientes Peruanos. Rev Peruana Reumatologia. 2003, 8: 6-13.Google Scholar
  96. Guillevin L, Durand-Gasselin B, Ceballos R, Gayraud M, Lhote F, Callard P, et al: Microscopic polyangiitis: Clinical and laboratory findings in eighty-five patients. Arthritis Rheum. 1999, 42: 421-30. 10.1002/1529-0131(199904)42:3<421::AID-ANR5>3.0.CO;2-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Saleh A: Classification and diagnostic criteria in systemic vasculitis. Best Prac Res Clin Rheumatol. 2005, 19: 209-21. 10.1016/j.berh.2004.09.001.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  98. Bacon PA: Classification of vasculitis: why, what and when?. APLAR J Rheumatol. 2004, 7: 146-49. 10.1111/j.1479-8077.2004.00077.x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  99. Bertoli AM, Alarcón GS: Classification of the vasculitis: Are they clinically useful?. Curr Rheum Report. 2005, 7: 265-269. 10.1007/s11926-005-0035-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Patarroyo et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement