Classification Criteria for Syphilitic Uveitis
- PMID: 33845020
- PMCID: PMC8594749
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.03.039
Classification Criteria for Syphilitic Uveitis
Abstract
Purpose: To determine classification criteria for syphilitic uveitis.
Design: Machine learning of cases with syphilitic uveitis and 24 other uveitides.
Methods: Cases of anterior, intermediate, posterior, and panuveitides were collected in an informatics-designed preliminary database, and a final database was constructed of cases achieving supermajority agreement on the diagnosis, using formal consensus techniques. Cases were analyzed by anatomic class, and each class was split into a training set and a validation set. Machine learning using multinomial logistic regression was used on the training set to determine a parsimonious set of criteria that minimized the misclassification rate among the different uveitic classes. The resulting criteria were evaluated on the validation set.
Results: Two hundred twenty-two cases of syphilitic uveitis were evaluated by machine learning, with cases evaluated against other uveitides in the relevant uveitic class. Key criteria for syphilitic uveitis included a compatible uveitic presentation (anterior uveitis; intermediate uveitis; or posterior or panuveitis with retinal, retinal pigment epithelial, or retinal vascular inflammation) and evidence of syphilis infection with a positive treponemal test. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reverse screening algorithm for syphilis testing is recommended. The misclassification rates for syphilitic uveitis in the training sets were as follows: anterior uveitides 0%, intermediate uveitides 6.0%, posterior uveitides 0%, panuveitides 0%, and infectious posterior/panuveitides 8.6%. The overall accuracy of the diagnosis of syphilitic uveitis in the validation set was 100% (99% confidence interval 99.5, 100)-that is, the validation set's misclassification rates were 0% for each uveitic class.
Conclusions: The criteria for syphilitic uveitis had a low misclassification rate and seemed to perform sufficiently well for use in clinical and translational research.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures





References
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Syphilis. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance; 2017. Accessed 11 April 2019 at cdc.gov.
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Syphilis. 2015. Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines. Accessed 11 April 2019 at cdc.gov.
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Discordant results from reverse syphilis screening – five laboratories, United States, 2006–10. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011;60:133–7. - PubMed
-
- Oliver SE, Aubin M, Atwell L, et al. Ocular syphilis – eight jurisdictions, United States, 2014–5. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2016;65:1185–8. - PubMed
-
- Mathew RG, Goh BT, Westcott MC. British ocular syphilis study (BOSS); 2-year national surveillance study of intraocular inflammation secondary to ocular syphilis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2014;55:5394–400. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical