OBJECTIVES: @entity432 ( @entity432 ) is performed in cases of suspected @entity226 ( @entity226 ), and is the gold-standard for diagnosis of the disease. Current American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria may aid in the diagnosis of @entity226 . We aimed to assess whether @entity432 is essential in all cases of suspected @entity226 , or whether ACR criteria can replace the need for this procedure in some cases. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 216 @entity1 who underwent @entity432 in a single hospital between 2000 and 2013. Pre- @entity432 and post- @entity432 ACR criteria were calculated. Sensitivity and specificity of ACR criteria for the diagnosis of @entity226 were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 55 @entity1 had histological evidence of @entity226 .Out of 161 @entity1 with negative @entity432 findings, 34 were diagnosed with @entity226 , and 127 were not diagnosed with @entity226 . Sensitivity of @entity432 for the diagnosis of @entity226 was 61.7%. Sensitivity and specificity of ACR criteria for diagnosis of @entity226 before performing @entity432 were 68.5% and 58%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of ACR criteria after performing @entity432 biopsy were 89.8% and 64.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: @entity432 should be performed in the majority of @entity1 with suspected @entity226 , and may be obviated only in @entity1 with a pre- @entity432 ACR score of  <= 1. In all other cases, when @entity226 is suspected, ACR criteria should not be a substitute to @entity432 , as they are not highly specific.

Is temporal artery biopsy essential in all cases of suspected XXXX ?

@entity432 :: ('MESH:D001157', 'Disease') :: ['TAB', 'Temporal artery biopsy'] @entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity226 :: ('MESH:D013700', 'Disease') :: ['giant cell arteritis', 'GCA']
@entity226 :: (MESH:D013700,Disease) :: ['giant cell arteritis']
