主页 > 医学动态 >
【文摘发布】致密物沉积病不是膜增生性肾小球
Dense deposit disease is not a membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis.
Walker PD, Ferrario F, Joh K, Bonsib SM.
Nephropathology Associates, Little Rock, AR, USA.
Dense deposit disease (first reported in 1962) was classified as subtype II of membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis in the early 1970s. Over the last 30 years, marked differences in etiology and pathogenesis between type I membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis and dense deposit disease have become apparent. The sporadic observation that dense deposit disease can be seen with markedly different light microscopy appearances prompted this study. The goal was to examine a large number of renal biopsies from around the world to characterize the histopathologic features of dense deposit disease. Eighty-one cases of dense deposit disease were received from centers across North America, Europe and Japan. Biopsy reports, light microscopy materials and electron photomicrographs were reviewed and histopathologic features scored. Sixty-nine cases were acceptable for review. Five patterns were seen: (1) membranoproliferative n=17; (2) mesangial proliferative n=30; (3) crescentic n=12; (4) acute proliferative and exudative n=8 and (5) unclassified n=2. The age range was 3-67 years, with 74% in the range of 3-20 years; 15% 21-30 years and 11% over 30 years. Males accounted for 54% and females 46%. All patients with either crescentic dense deposit disease or acute proliferative dense deposit disease were between the ages of 3 and 18 years. The essential diagnostic feature of dense deposit disease is not the membranoproliferative pattern but the presence of electron dense transformation of the glomerular basement membranes. Based upon this study and the extensive data developed over the past 30 years, dense deposit disease is clinically distinct from membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis and is morphologically heterogeneous with only a minority of cases having a membranoproliferative pattern. Therefore, dense deposit disease should no longer be regarded as a subtype of membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis 本人已认领该文编译，48小时后若未提交译文，请其他战友自由认领。 题目: 致密物沉积病不是膜增生性肾小球肾炎
致密物沉积病(1962年初次报道该病)早在20世纪70年代被归类于 II型膜增生性肾小球肾炎.纵观过去30多年时间, II型膜增生性肾小球肾炎与致密物沉积病两者的病因学和发病机理已经表露出了显著差别.这个研究,散在观察提示致密物沉积病其光学显微镜显著差别.这个研究主要是通过检查一大批世界各地肾活检患者从而来定位致密物沉积病的组织病理学.接收了81位跨过北美洲,欧洲和日本中心的致密物沉积病患者.通过肾活检报告,光学显微镜和电子显微镜的观察,组织病理学特点评分,其中69例患者接受进一步的考察.将其分为5种类型1)膜增生型 n=17; (2)系膜增生型 n=30; (3)新月体型 n=12; (4)急性增生与渗出型 n=8 和(5)未分类n=2. 年龄范围为3~67岁,74%为3~20岁,15%为21~30岁,11%为>30岁.其中男性总共占54%,女性为46%.所有病人中,新月体致密物沉积病患者和急性增生性致密物沉积病患者年龄都在3~18岁.诊断新月体致密物沉积病特征不是膜增生型而是肾小球基底膜存在电子致密物的转化.基于以上研究和过去30多年比较广泛的数据资料,表明致密物沉积病临床上和形态学上不同于膜增生性肾小球肾炎,仅有少数几例患者呈现膜增生型.因此,致密物沉积病以后不能再归为膜增生性肾小球肾炎的亚型.
prompted?在本文中的意思.由于本人的笨拙,还是没有明白致密物沉积病与膜增生性肾小球肾炎之间的差别.请confusing组长指点迷津!谢谢! The sporadic observation that dense deposit disease can be seen with markedly different light microscopy appearances prompted this study. The goal was to examine a large number of renal biopsies from around the world to characterize the histopathologic features of dense deposit disease.
散在的观察发现致密物沉积病的光学显微镜下表现差异非常大，从而促成了本研究的实施。目的在于通过检视大量世界各地的肾活检资料来确定致密物沉积病的组织病理特征。 Dense deposit disease (first reported in 1962) was classified as subtype II of membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis in the early 1970s.
致密物沉积病(1962年初次报道该病)早在20世纪70年代被归类于 II型膜增生性肾小球肾炎.
Over the last 30 years, marked differences in etiology and pathogenesis between type II membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis and dense deposit disease have become apparent.
纵观过去30多年时间, II型膜增生性肾小球肾炎与致密物沉积病两者的病因学和发病机理已经表露出了显著差别.
The sporadic observation that dense deposit disease can be seen with markedly different light microscopy appearances prompted this study. The goal was to examine a large number of renal biopsies from around the world to characterize the histopathologic features of dense deposit disease.
阅读本文的人还阅读：
作者:admin@医学,生命科学 2011-06-21 17:13
医学,生命科学网