Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2018 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 4

Takayasu arteritis: an update

Pages
681–697
Publication Date
2022-11-03
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Prognosis of TAK is probably getting better with lower mortality rates reported in recentyears, probably due to the use of more effective medical treatments as well as the use of endovascular interventions when necessary andavailable.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Abstract: Takayasu arteritis (TAK) is a challenging chronic, granulomatous, large-vessel systemic vasculitis, mostly due to difficulties inearly diagnosis and assessing actual disease activity.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Despite its limitations, the Indian TakayasuClinical Activity Score (ITAS2010) may also be helpful for this purpose.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Prognosis of TAK is probably getting better with lower mortality rates reported in recentyears, probably due to the use of more effective medical treatments as well as the use of endovascular interventions when necessary andavailable.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Abstract: Takayasu arteritis (TAK) is a challenging chronic, granulomatous, large-vessel systemic vasculitis, mostly due to difficulties inearly diagnosis and assessing actual disease activity. Since there are no specific diagnostic laboratory tests, biomarkers, or autoantibodies,many patients experience considerable delay in diagnosis. Remembering the possibility of TAK together with the use of acute phaseresponses and appropriate imaging studies may be helpful for early diagnosis. Since there may be discrepancies between systemic andvascular wall inflammation, using only acute phase responses is not reliable in assessing current disease activity. Therefore, physicalexamination and new imaging findings should also be used to assess current disease activity. Despite its limitations, the Indian TakayasuClinical Activity Score (ITAS2010) may also be helpful for this purpose. The rationale of medical treatment is to suppress both vascular andsystemic inflammation with appropriate systemic immunosuppression, including corticosteroids and conventional immunosuppressiveagents. In cases of refractory disease activity, leflunomide and biologic agents such as TNF inhibitors and tocilizumab may be tried.In selected cases with persistent lesions that cannot be reversed with medical treatment, endovascular interventions including balloonangioplasty, stent and stent graft replacement, or surgery may be tried. However, such procedures should be performed after suppressionof inflammation, i.e. during inactive disease. Prognosis of TAK is probably getting better with lower mortality rates reported in recentyears, probably due to the use of more effective medical treatments as well as the use of endovascular interventions when necessary andavailable.

🔖

Cite This Article

DİRESKENELİ, H., AKSU, K., KESER, G. (2022). Takayasu arteritis: an update. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 4, 681–697. https://ajindex.com/articles/610358

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Numano F. The story of Takayasu arteritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2002; 41: 103-106. Mason JC. Takayasu arteritis—advances in diagnosis and management. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2010; 6: 406. Grayson PC, Maksimowicz-McKinnon K, Clark TM, Tomasson G, Cuthbertson D, Carette S, Khalidi NA, Langford CA, Monach PA, Seo P et al. Distribution of arterial lesions in Takayasu’s arteritis and giant cell arteritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2012; 71: 1329-1334.
  2. Kerr GS, Hallahan CW, Giordano J, Leavitt RY, Fauci AS, Rottem M, Hoffman GS. Takayasu arteritis. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 919-929.
  3. Brunner J, Feldman BM, Tyrrell PN, Kuemmerle-Deschner JB, Zimmerhackl LB, Gassner I, Benseler SM. Takayasu arteritis in children and adolescents. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2010; 49: 1806-1814.
  4. Nazareth R, Mason J. Takayasu arteritis: severe consequences of delayed diagnosis. QJM 2010; 104: 797-800.
  5. Watts R, Al-Taiar A, Mooney J, Scott D, MacGregor A. The epidemiology of Takayasu arteritis in the UK. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2009; 48: 1008-1011.
  6. Alibaz-Oner F, Direskeneli H. Update on Takayasu’s arteritis. La Presse Médicale 2015; 44: e259-e265. 9. Mustafa KN. Takayasu’s arteritis in Arabs. Clin Rheumatol 2014; 33: 1777-1783.
  7. Birlik M, Kücükyavas Y, Aksu K, Solmaz D, Can G, Taylan A, Akar S, Sari I, Keser G, Onen F et al. Epidemiology of Takayasu’s arteritis in Turkey. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2016; 34: S33-39. Saritas F, Donmez S, Direskeneli H, Pamuk ON. The epidemiology of Takayasu arteritis: a hospital-based study from northwestern part of Turkey. Rheumatol Int 2016; 36: 911-916.
  8. Arnaud L, Haroche J, Limal N, Toledano D, Gambotti L, Chalumeau NC, Cacoub P, Cluzel P, Koskas F, Kieffer E et al. Takayasu arteritis in France: a single-center retrospective study of 82 cases comparing white, North African, and black patients. Medicine 2010; 89: 1-17.
  9. Vanoli M, Daina E, Salvarani C, Sabbadini M, Rossi C, Bacchiani G, Schieppati A, Baldissera E, Bertolini G. Takayasu’s arteritis: a study of 104 Italian patients. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 53: 100-107.
  10. Bicakcigil M, Aksu K, Kamali S, Ozbalkan Z, Ates A, Karadag O, Ozer H, Seyahi E, Akar S, Onen F et al. Takayasu’s arteritis in Turkey—clinical and angiographic features of 248 patients. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2009; 27: S59-64. Park MC, Lee SW, Park YB, Chung N, Lee SK. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of Takayasu’s arteritis: analysis of 108 patients using standardized criteria for diagnosis, activity assessment, and angiographic classification. Scand J Rheumatol 2005; 34: 2