Tab Application Banner
  • Users Online: 515
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 120-126

Classification of vasculitis: From historical controversies to present day pragmatic consensus


Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich; Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Correspondence Address:
Richard A Watts
Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich; Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.1016/j.injr.2014.06.001

Rights and Permissions

The classification of the systemic vasculitides has been controversial for several decades. However, over the past twenty years there have been several major developments, which means that there is pragmatic consensus regarding classification. These include the American College of Rheumatology criteria first published in 1990, and the Chapel Hill Consensus Conference definitions originally promulgated in 1994, but revised and extended in 2012. More recently the classical division of the ANCA vasculitides using clinical phenotype has come under scrutiny with evidence from epidemiological, genetic and outcome studies that perhaps these conditions should be classified on the basis of ANCA specificity into PR3-ANCA positive and MPO-ANCA positive groups. There remains, however, a major need for validated classification and diagnostic criteria, a need which hopefully the DCVAS project will address.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed595    
    Printed10    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded185    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal