High NEMO score values in nailfold videocapillaroscopy are associated with the subsequent development of ischaemic digital ulcers in patients with systemic sclerosis.
Ischaemic digital ulcers
Nailfold videocapillaroscopy
Systemic sclerosis
Journal
Arthritis research & therapy
ISSN: 1478-6362
Titre abrégé: Arthritis Res Ther
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101154438
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 10 2020
13 10 2020
Historique:
received:
21
06
2020
accepted:
04
10
2020
entrez:
14
10
2020
pubmed:
15
10
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Nailfold videocapillaroscopy (NVC) is a feasible method that allows the observation of the microvascular changes that mark the course of systemic sclerosis (SSc). In previous studies, we demonstrated that the NEMO score, i.e. the cumulative number of microhaemorrhages and microthromboses, is a good indicator of the steady-state level and overtime changes of disease activity (DA) in SSc. To verify whether high NEMO scores, which mirror a very active microvascular derangement in the fingers, may be associated with the subsequent development of ischaemic digital ulcers (IDUs). The NEMO score was assessed at baseline (T0) in 98 patients with SSc, all classified according to the ACR-EULAR criteria. Of them, 90 were females, 48 had the limited and 50 had the diffuse cutaneous variant of SSc. Afterwards, the patients were closely followed up for 2 years, and the appearance of new IDUs recorded at any time of the follow-up. The T0-NEMO score values of patients who developed IDUs were compared to those of patients who did not. A receiver operating curve (ROC) was constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) calculated by plotting the sensitivity and 1-specificity of the different NEMO score values in predicting the subsequent development of IDUs. During the follow-up, 38 out of 98 patients developed one or more IDUs. The NEMO score at T0 was significantly higher in those who developed IDUs with respect to those who did not [median 14.5 (95% CI 11.0-21.5) and 4.5 (95% CI 4.0-6.0), respectively, p < 0.0001]. The ROC curve derived from different T0-NEMO score values had an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.69-0.86, p < 0.0001). A NEMO score of ≥ 12 had a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% CI 71.5-91.7) and a specificity of 63.2% (95% CI 46.0-78.2), with positive (P) and negative (N) predictive (PV) values of 58.9% (95% CI 44.7-72.2) and 85.6% (71.8-94.4), respectively. A NEMO score of ≥ 16 had a sensitivity of 95.0% (95% CI 86.1-99.0) and a NPV of 93.4% (77.5-99.2). Being a valid tool to measure DA levels in SSc, the NEMO score also appears to be closely related to the subsequent development of IDUs in this disease.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Nailfold videocapillaroscopy (NVC) is a feasible method that allows the observation of the microvascular changes that mark the course of systemic sclerosis (SSc). In previous studies, we demonstrated that the NEMO score, i.e. the cumulative number of microhaemorrhages and microthromboses, is a good indicator of the steady-state level and overtime changes of disease activity (DA) in SSc.
OBJECTIVES
To verify whether high NEMO scores, which mirror a very active microvascular derangement in the fingers, may be associated with the subsequent development of ischaemic digital ulcers (IDUs).
METHODS
The NEMO score was assessed at baseline (T0) in 98 patients with SSc, all classified according to the ACR-EULAR criteria. Of them, 90 were females, 48 had the limited and 50 had the diffuse cutaneous variant of SSc. Afterwards, the patients were closely followed up for 2 years, and the appearance of new IDUs recorded at any time of the follow-up. The T0-NEMO score values of patients who developed IDUs were compared to those of patients who did not. A receiver operating curve (ROC) was constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) calculated by plotting the sensitivity and 1-specificity of the different NEMO score values in predicting the subsequent development of IDUs.
RESULTS
During the follow-up, 38 out of 98 patients developed one or more IDUs. The NEMO score at T0 was significantly higher in those who developed IDUs with respect to those who did not [median 14.5 (95% CI 11.0-21.5) and 4.5 (95% CI 4.0-6.0), respectively, p < 0.0001]. The ROC curve derived from different T0-NEMO score values had an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.69-0.86, p < 0.0001). A NEMO score of ≥ 12 had a sensitivity of 83.3% (95% CI 71.5-91.7) and a specificity of 63.2% (95% CI 46.0-78.2), with positive (P) and negative (N) predictive (PV) values of 58.9% (95% CI 44.7-72.2) and 85.6% (71.8-94.4), respectively. A NEMO score of ≥ 16 had a sensitivity of 95.0% (95% CI 86.1-99.0) and a NPV of 93.4% (77.5-99.2).
CONCLUSIONS
Being a valid tool to measure DA levels in SSc, the NEMO score also appears to be closely related to the subsequent development of IDUs in this disease.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33050944
doi: 10.1186/s13075-020-02342-5
pii: 10.1186/s13075-020-02342-5
pmc: PMC7556978
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
237Références
Arthritis Res Ther. 2019 Nov 29;21(1):258
pubmed: 31783890
Arthritis Rheum. 2009 May 15;61(5):688-94
pubmed: 19405007
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jan;76(1):270-276
pubmed: 27621285
J Rheumatol. 1988 Feb;15(2):202-5
pubmed: 3361530
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004 Aug;43(8):1025-7
pubmed: 15187240
J Rheumatol. 2000 Jan;27(1):155-60
pubmed: 10648032
Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Apr;50(4):1296-304
pubmed: 15077314
Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Jul;58(7):2174-82
pubmed: 18576359
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 Sep;65(9):1460-71
pubmed: 23554239
Arthritis Res Ther. 2014 Oct 09;16(5):462
pubmed: 25296743
Arthritis Rheum. 2013 Nov;65(11):2737-47
pubmed: 24122180
BMJ Open. 2015 Mar 16;5(3):e006389
pubmed: 25776043
Ann Rheum Dis. 2007 Jun;66(6):754-63
pubmed: 17234652
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2017 Dec;14(12):961-967
pubmed: 29161915
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Aug;76(8):1327-1339
pubmed: 27941129
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2013 Apr;27(2):237-48
pubmed: 23731933
Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Jun;67(6):885-7
pubmed: 18037628
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008 Oct;47 Suppl 5:v14-5
pubmed: 18784128
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2008 Dec;22(6):1093-108
pubmed: 19041079
Microvasc Res. 2017 Jul;112:41-46
pubmed: 28274735
Medicine (Baltimore). 2002 Mar;81(2):139-53
pubmed: 11889413
Ann Rheum Dis. 2001 Jun;60(6):592-8
pubmed: 11350848
Ann Rheum Dis. 2003 Sep;62(9):901-3
pubmed: 12922968
Ann Rheum Dis. 1988 Jan;47(1):53-61
pubmed: 3345105
Microvasc Res. 2019 Jul;124:51-53
pubmed: 30877018
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009 Jun;48 Suppl 3:iii19-24
pubmed: 19487218
Arthritis Res Ther. 2017 Jun 13;19(1):133
pubmed: 28610600
N Engl J Med. 2009 May 7;360(19):1989-2003
pubmed: 19420368