Introduction: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease caused by many polyclonal autoantibodies and characterized by numerous comorbid lesions of internal organs and systems. Research with respect to the role of various infectious agents in the development and course of SLE, and primarily the role of cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), is ongoing. It is important to find out whether patients with SLE are infected with CMV and EBV, since the clinical manifestations of SLE and active viral infection are similar.

Aim: To find out the infection of SLE patients with CMV and EBV.

Materials and methods: The study included 115 patients with SLE, among whom women of working age predominated. The study was conducted in three stages: to find out CMV infection, to detect EBV infection, to determine the simultaneous infection of SLE patients with CMV and EBV and, in particular, their active phases. The actual material was processed on a personal computer in Excel (Microsoft) and IBM SPSS Statistics using descriptive statistics.

Results: It was found that the serum of the vast majority of SLE patients has specific antibodies to CMV, and only three have no antibodies to the virus. IgM antibodies to CMV were detected in 22.61% of patients, which may indicate an active phase of infection. Most often, the CMV seroprofile was detected as a combination of IgG (+) and IgM (-) (74.78%) among patients with SLE. It was established that the absolute majority of SLE patients are infected with EBV (98.26%). Active EBV infection was found in 15.65% of SLE patients, and chronic persistent - in 53.91%. Most often (53.91%) there are SLE patients with a seroprofile in the combination of EBV IgG to NA (+) IgG to EA (+) VCA IgM (-).

Most often (41.74%) SLE patients had a combination of laboratory markers of viral infection in the form of seroprofile CMV IgG (+) IgM (-); EBV IgG to EA (+) IgG to NA (+) IgM to VCA (-). The active phase of CMV and/or EBV infection was present in 32.17% of SLE patients, of which: 16.52% had only active CMV infection, 9.57% - only active EBV infection, and 6.09% – a combination of active CMV and EBV infections, which indicates that more than a third of SLE patients have active CMV and/or EBV infections, which can affect the clinical manifestations of the disease and require specific treatment tactics.

Conclusion: Almost all patients with SLE are infected with CMV, among whom 22.61% of patients have active infection. The absolute majority of SLE patients are infected with EBV, of which 15.65% had an active infection. Most often, SLE patients had a combination of laboratory markers of infection in the form of seroprofile CMV IgG (+) IgM (-); EBV IgG to EA (+) IgG to NA (+) IgM to VCA (-). The active phase of CMV and/or EBV infection was present in 32.17% of patients with SLE, of which: 16.52% had only active CMV infection, 9.57% only active EBV infection, and 6.09% – a combination of active CMV and EBV infections.

УДК 616.72-002.77-06:[616.71-018.4:612.015.7]-073.48-73.75

Вступ. Ревматоїдний артрит (РА) – хронічна системна хвороба сполучної тканини нез’ясованої етіології складного автоімунного патогенезу, яка часто ускладнюється вторинним остеопорозом (ОП), що погіршує перебіг і прогноз основної хвороби.
Мета. Дослідити частоту й характер уражень кісток у хворих на ревматоїдний артрит, виявлених за допомогою ультразвукової та рентгеностеоденситометрії, з’ясувати їх діагностичну цінність для оцінки мінеральної щільности кісткової тканини. 
Матеріали й методи. У дослідження в рандомізований спосіб із попередньою стратифікацією за наявністю РА, діагностованого згідно з критеріями Американської колегії ревматологів та Європейської ліги проти ревматизму (2010) у жінок пременопаузального періоду та чоловіків зрілого віку, включено 74 хворих (62 жінки (84,93 %) і 12 чоловіків (15,07 %) віком від 38 до 60 років (середній вік на час обстеження жінок – 48,67 ± 2,34 року, чоловіків – 45,42 ± 2,78 року)), що лікувалися, вживаючи метилпреднізолон (4,0–24,0 мг/добу) та не отримуючи лікарські засоби для лікування ОП, у ревматологічному відділі Комунального некомерційного підприємства Львівської обласної ради «Львівська обласна клінічна лікарня» з 2013 по 2019 рік (дослідна група – ДГ). Контрольну групу (КГ) створено з 29 здорових осіб (22 жінки (75,86 %) та 7 чоловіків (24,14 %), середній вік жінок на час обстеження 44,95 ± 2,12 року, чоловіків – 40,71 ± 2,75 року) аналогічних статі й віку. Усім хворим проведено оцінку МЩКТ за допомогою ультразвукової кісткової денситометрії п’яткової кістки та рентгеностеоденситометрії кисти.
Результати. Виявлено міцний кореляційний зв’язок між результатами ультразвукової денситометрії п’яткової кістки та рентгеностеоденситометрії кисти, що дає підстави рекомендувати діагностувати зміни МЩКТ обома методами, причому, чутливішим виявився метод рентгеностеоденситометрії. 
Висновки. Застосування обох методів діагностики ОП, а саме – ультразвукової денситометрії п’яткової кістки та рентгеностеоденситометрії кисти у хворих на ревматоїдний артрит є науково обґрунтованим. 

УДК 616.36-004:616-007.251:616.71-007.234]-07

Introduction. The problem of osteoporotic fractures and the evaluation thresholds forintervention in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) remains obscure so far.Ukrainian model offracture risk assessment (FRAX®) has never been implemented among patients with LC in Ukraine.

The aim of the study. To find out the peculiarities of the Ukrainian model of Fracture Risk Assessment, its diagnostic and prognostic value for implementation among patients with liver cirrhosis accompanied by impaired bone mineral density.

Materials and methods.90 patients with LC(27 women and 63 men aged 18 to 66 years) were randomly assignedinto the study. Stratification into groups was based on information about bone condition. 72 patients were included intoan experimental group (EG, patients with impaired bone mineral density (IBMD), which was divided into two subgroups – EG A (patients with osteopenia, 46) and EG B (patients with osteoporosis, 26). Controlgroup (CG) included18 patients without IBMD.

The peculiaritiesof the fracture risk factors and evaluation thresholds according to the Ukrainian FRAX® model (2019) amoung patients with LC with bone disorderswereestablished (significant differences betweenfrequency of features in groups and substantial stochastic associations of featureswithIBMD or its manifestations were investigated). The diagnostic characteristcs (diagnostic value,predictive value, likelihood ratio) of the detected features for IBMDin general,osteopenia and osteoporosis in particular, were revealed, and after that the post-test probability of certain bone disorders was determined among all patients with LCin the case ofapplying the identified features.

The results.It was found that although most of the risk factors occurred more often in patients with bone disorders, significant differences were detected only between the frequency of previous fractures in EGand CG, including EGB and CG,and EGA and EGB; between the frequency of cases of normal body weight, as well as overweight in EGand CG, including EGB and CG. The evaluation thresholdsaccording to the Ukrainian FRAX® model also differed significantly: the values above the upper evaluation threshold – in EGB and CGand in EGA and EGB; theintermediatevalues of fracture risk – in EGA and CG; the values below the lower evaluation threshold – in EGand CG, as well as in EGA and CGand in EGB and CG, including. Bone disorders had a substantialdirect stochastic associationin the following cases: IBMD in general – with the previous fractures, normal body weight and values above the upper evaluation threshold; osteopenia – with the previous fractures, normal body weight and intermediate values of fracture risk; osteoporosis – with the previous fractures, normal body weight andvalues abovethe upper evaluation threshold.All manifestations of bone disorders had substantial negativestochastic association with overweight and values below the lower evaluation threshold, as well as osteoporosis withshort height (indicates that features are inherent for normal bone mineral density).

It was foundoutthat fracture risk factors and evaluation thresholdsaccording to the Ukrainian FRAX® model are mainly single-vector markers, since they can confirm the disease beingdetected, or deny it in thecasethey are absent. The previous fractures are highly specific for IBMD, especially for osteoporosis, and can be useful for confirming these disorders beingpresent in patient with LC.The normal body weight is medium-specific for IBMD and for osteoporosis, but can be more useful for indicating IBMD if it is present, andexcluding osteoporosis being absent. The values above the upper evaluation threshold according to the Ukrainian FRAX® modelare highly specific forosteoporosis and can confirm osteoporisis being present. The intermediate values of fracture risk according to the Ukrainian FRAX® modelare medium-specificfor osteopenia, but can be more useful forexcluding osteopenia if they are absent. The overweight,especially the values below the lowerevaluation threshold, will most likely indicatenormal bone mineral density.

Conclusions.The use of the Ukrainian modelofFracture Risk Assessment (FRAX®) has certain peculiarities and can be valuable tool for detecting or excluding impaired bone mineral density in patients with liver cirrhosis.