Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2025

An Immunohistopathologic Study to Profile the Folate Receptor Beta Macrophage and Vascular Immune Microenvironment in Giant Cell Arteritis
Published on: February 8, 2019
Can a Giant Cell Arteritis (GCA) Risk Stratification Score Be Helpful in Clinical Practice?
Muhamad Jasim1, Priyan Magan1, Ferin Patel2
1Rheumatology, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, GBR.
Insights
A scoring system for giant cell arteritis (GCA) accurately predicts ultrasound results, aiding diagnosis. While not infallible, this tool helps clinicians manage suspected GCA cases effectively.
Area of Science:
- Rheumatology
- Vasculitis Research
- Diagnostic Imaging
Background:
- Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common large vessel vasculitis.
- Diagnosing GCA presents challenges, balancing over- and under-investigation.
- Proposed scoring systems aim to risk-stratify patients with suspected GCA.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the accuracy of a GCA probability score in predicting ultrasound positivity.
- To assess the utility of scoring systems in clinical decision-making for suspected GCA.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing temporal artery biopsy (TAB) or ultrasound (USS) for suspected GCA.
- Analysis of electronic medical records from June 2014 to January 2019.
- Inclusion of 174 patients, with data from TAB and USS procedures.
Main Results:
- The GCA probability score accurately predicted biopsy-positive GCA.
- The score showed similar accuracy in predicting ultrasound positivity.
- 0% misclassification in the low-risk biopsy cohort; 8% misclassification in the low-risk ultrasound cohort.
Conclusions:
- A probability score derived from biopsy-positive GCA patients predicts ultrasound positivity with comparable accuracy.
- Scoring systems are valuable tools for guiding clinical decisions in suspected GCA.
- These systems, while not infallible, improve diagnostic accuracy and patient management.
Introduction:
Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common type of large vessel vasculitis. The diagnosis of GCA is often challenging and there is a difficult balance of over- and underinvestigation. There have been several proposed scoring systems to help clinicians risk stratify patients who may present with suspected GCA.
Methods:
A retrospective cohort study was performed using electronic medical records of patients referred for a temporal artery biopsy (TAB) and temporal artery ultrasound scan (USS) for suspected GCA. All TABs performed at the Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust between June 2014 and June 2018 and all USS procedures performed between January 2015 and January 2019 were analysed. Patients who undergo a USS for suspected GCA at our centre routinely have scanned bilateral temporal and axillary arteries. Patients were excluded if they already had a previous diagnosis of GCA (and the clinical question was suspected flare), or if there was insufficient information available.
Results:
The total number of patients who underwent a confirmatory diagnostic test (either TAB or USS) for suspected GCA was 187. Thirteen of these patients met the exclusion criteria, the remaining 174 patients were included for analysis. A total of 126 of 174 patients underwent a TAB and 63 of 174 had a USS performed; 15 of 174 who had both these were included in the USS cohort because for all these patients, the ultrasound was the first diagnostic test performed. Our results appear to closely mirror the original multi-centre results with regard to the prediction of biopsy-positive GCA, with the centiles closely following those in the inception cohort. Also, 0% of the 'low' risk probability biopsy cohort were misclassified; none had a positive biopsy. However, 8% of the low-risk-probability ultrasound cohort were misclassified, as two had a positive ultrasound.
Conclusion:
Our study highlights that a probability score for GCA derived from a large multi-centre cohort of patients who were biopsy positive predicts ultrasound positivity with similar accuracy. Our work reveals that scoring systems are not infallible but can be helpful in guiding clinical decision making.
More Related Videos
07:25Author Spotlight: A Focus on Standardized Salivary Gland Ultrasound Protocol in Connective Tissue Disease Research
Published on: October 13, 2023
06:57Author Spotlight: Advancing Cardiovascular Imaging - Introducing the Spatially Weighted Calcium Score for Early Disease Detection
Published on: September 22, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
Atherosclerosis III: Management
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Genome-wide Association Studies-GWAS
GWAS does not require the identification of the target gene involved in...
Atherosclerosis II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Tests
Rheumatic Heart Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies