Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on April 4, 2008
Rheumatology 2008 47(6):926-927; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/ken098
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR |
Is FDG-PET useful in the evaluation of steroid-resistant PMR patients?
Clinica Reumatologica, Dipartimento di Medicina Interna, Università di Genova, Italy
Correspondence to: M. A. Cimmino, Clinica Reumatologica, Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialità Mediche, Viale Benedetto XV, 6, 16132 Genova, Italy. E-mail: cimmino@unige.it
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
SIR, Blockmans et al. [1] showed that 31% of the patients with newly-diagnosed polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) have moderate PET signs of vasculitis, especially of the subclavian arteries. Not surprisingly, more prominent vasculitic changes were found in 74% of the patients with GCA [2]. We have performed PET in steroid-resistant PMR patients with the aim of ascertaining whether undetected vasculitic changes could explain steroid resistance. Diagnosing large-vessel vasculitis should be relevant in this setting,