Skip to main content


We're creating a new version of this page. See preview

  • Review
  • Open Access

Different histological classifications for Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis: which one should be used?

Pediatric Rheumatology201917:10

  • Received: 21 December 2018
  • Accepted: 21 February 2019
  • Published:



Nephritis is the most important chronic complication of IgA Vasculitis (IgAV)/Henoch-Schönlein purpura (IGAV/HSP) and thus the main prognostic factor of this most common childhood vasculitis. Since the prognosis and treatment selection depends on the mode of interpretation of biopsy material, in this manuscript we have presented several issues related to the uneven application of different histological classifications in IgAV/Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis (HSPN). The nephritis of IgAV/IGAV/HSP will be abbreviated as HSPN for this paper.

Main body

In clinical practice we use different histological classifications for HSPN. It is not known which of these classifications best correlates with severity of renal disease and renal outcome in IgAV/IGAV/HSP. One of the major problem with existing histological classifications is that there is no consensus on the implementation of biopsy in the treatment of HSPN. There is a histologic classification system conventionally used in HSPN, of the International Study of Kidney Disease in Children (ISKDC). On the other hand there is the new classification system suggested for IgA nephropathy, the Oxford classification. The latter has been validated only in IgA nephropathy. There are also two further histologic classifications of Haas and Koskela that have been developed. Current treatment strategies in HSPN are not standardised nor predominantly based on histological classification.


One of the possible solutions to problems related to the application of different histological classification in HSPN is the implementation of multicenter multinational prospective studies with joint collaboration between pediatric rheumatologists, nephrologists and nephropathologists to correlate the clinical features and outcome with the classification systems as well among the classifications. This classification should be the basis for the construction of guidelines for the treatment of patients with HSPN.


  • Henoch-Schönlein purpura
  • IgA Vasculitis
  • Glomerulonephritis
  • Biopsy
  • Histology
  • Children


Henoch-Schönlein purpura (IGAV/HSP) or IgA vasculitis (IgAV) is the most frequent form of vasculitis in childhood, with an annual incidence of 13–20/100000 children under 17 years of age [1, 2]. The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization (PRINTO) and Paediatric Rheumatology European Society (PRES) (EULAR/PRINTO/PRES) defined the criteria for diagnosis of IgAV/IGAV/HSP [3].

Although the disease is typically self-limiting and the prognosis is largely good [4], renal involvement may advance and cause permanent organ damage in the form of severe nephritis (HSPN) [5] making the renal involvement of the disease the main prognostic factor [6, 7].

Since the confirmation of diagnosis of HSPN requires a biopsy of the kidneys, and histological classification of the obtained material has an important role to determine prognosis and therapy selection, in this review article we aim to describe existing problems related to the commonly used histological classifications for predicting outcome in HSPN.

Main text

Renal manifestations in IGAV/HSP

Renal involvement occurs in a variable proportion (20–60%) of children suffering from IGAV/HSP [2, 7, 8]. Vast majority of children with IGAV/HSP (97%) develop features of renal involvement within 6 months of disease onset, but sometimes HSPN may occur later [7, 911]. The renal disease spectrum ranges from urinary abnormalities (including hematuria or/and proteinuria) through nephritic and nephrotic syndrome to chronic renal failure. Renal involvement is typically mild and manifested only by pathological urine findings. The greatest number of patients with HSPN, about 50% of them, develop simultaneous hematuria and proteinuria [9, 12]. Nephritic or nephrotic syndrome occurs in about 20% of HSPN patients [9, 12]. Chronic renal failure in children was noted to occur in a wide range of proportions of patients, from 1 to 15% [7, 9, 13, 14]. Patients with both nephritic and nephrotic syndrome have the highest risk for progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD): more than 50% of them will develop long-term renal impairment, compared to about 5% of patients with urinary abnormalities (hematuria and/or proteinuria) [9, 12].

Different histological classifications for HSPN

Due to the fact that glomerulonephritis is the major cause of mortality and morbidity among children suffering from IGAV/HSP, the prognosis of the disease largely relies on the renal involvement of IGAV/HSP [6, 9]. A kidney biopsy is mandatory for the diagnosis of HSPN. However, its value as a predictor of the outcome is dependent on many variables, principally on the classification used. Today we use different histological classifications for HSPN and four of them, utilized in clinical practice and research studies, are described below.

The International Study of Kidney Disease in Children (ISKDC) classification [15, 16] is still the most frequently used for histological analysis of renal biopsy findings in HSPN [17] (Table 1). The basic morphological changes underlying to a big extent of this classification are crescents. These lesions, whose pathogenic mechanism of development is still not elucidated, are associated with capillary wall destruction due to fibrinoid necrosis, which is linked with endocapillary proliferation and infiltration of inflammatory cells, including macrophages and neutrophils [18]. According to ISKDC classification, renal biopsies can be categorized into one of six histological grades. The first five grades of histological lesions are based on the presence and number of crescents. Grade VI represents membranoproliferative like glomerulonephritis, characterized with changes in the mesangial elements and the glomerular capillary wall. Crescents seemed a promising prognostic factor according to earlier studies, but in later publications the correlation between crescents and outcome has not always been confirmed [10, 1921]. Namely, studies have shown that even patients with low grade histologic lesions, in the absence of crescents, may develop chronic renal failure and that patients with higher histological stages may experience spontaneous healing of lesions [10, 20, 21]. Unfortunately this grading system, being grounded mostly on the state of glomeruli, only reflects active inflammation, in the same time neglecting vascular and tubulointerstitial changes [19, 22].
Table 1

The International Study of Kidney Disease in Children (ISKDC) classification of Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis (a modification according to ref. [16])

ISKDC grade


Grade I

Minimal alterations

Grade II

Mesangial proliferation

Grade III

Proliferation or sclerosis with < 50% crescents ((a) focal or (b) diffuse)

Grade IV

Mesangial proliferation or sclerosis with 50–75%, crescents ((a) focal or (b) diffuse)

Grade V

Mesangial proliferation or sclerosis with > 75% crescents ((a) focal or (b) diffuse)

Grade VI

Membranoproliferative like glomerulonephritis

It was subsequently shown that the proportion of sclerotic glomeruli and interstitial fibrosis correlates better with the long-term outcome, leading to the idea that the Oxford classification, used in IgA nephropathy, could be used in predicting the progression of renal disease in HSPN [2325]. This scoring system published in 2009 initially included four morphologic features: mesangial hypercellularity (M), endocapillary proliferation (E), segmental glomerulosclerosis/adhesion (S) and tubular atrophy/interstitial fibrosis (T) [26, 27]. These four parameters formed the MEST score. Crescents were not included in the first version of the classification. The working group has made recommendations for changes to the Oxford classification in 2016 and has proposed the addition of a C (crescent score) to MEST as well as revising the S score, considering the presence or absence of podocytopathic features (podocyte hypertrophy/tip lesions). The revised Oxford classification includes MEST-C score [28] (Table 2). However, the working group does not recommend the use of MEST-C score in HSPN since cases of patients with this condition were not included in the validation cohort.
Table 2

The Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy (according to ref. [28])

Histological variable


Mesangial hypercellularity

M0 < 50% of glomeruli showing mesangial hypercellularity

M1 > 50% of glomeruli showing mesangial hypercellularity

Endocapillary hypercellularity

E0 absent

E1 present

Segmental glomerulosclerosis/adhesion

S0 absent

S1 present

presence or absence of podocyte hypertrophy/tip lesions in biopsies with S1

Tubular atrophy/interstitial fibrosis

T0 ≤ 25% of the cortical area affected by tubular atrophy or interstitial fibrosis

T1 26–50% of the cortical area affected by tubular atrophy or interstitial fibrosis

T2 > 50% of the cortical area affected by tubular atrophy or interstitial fibrosis

Cellular/fibrocellular crescents

C0 absent

C1 present in at least one glomerulus

C2 present in > 25% of glomeruli

Modified with permission from Elsevier Ltd.©

Histologic classification of IgA nephropathy of Haas is based on retrospective studies using development of ESRD as their primary endpoint. Haas reviewed the histologic features of 244 cases of IgA nephropathy and using this histologic classification found statistically significant correlation between IgA subclass and renal survival [29] (Table 3).
Table 3

Histologic classification of IgA nephropathy of Haas (according to ref. [29])

Haas classification


Class I – Minimal histologic lesion

Glomeruli are normocellular, without segmental sclerosis, necrosis, or crescents.

Class II – Focal-segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS)-like

Glomeruli show focal and segmental sclerosis without mesangial or endocapillary hypercellularity, crescents, or necrosis.

Class III – Focal proliferative glomerulonephritis

50% or fewer of the glomeruli (not including globally sclerotic glomeruli) are hypercellular. This hypercellularity may be limited to mesangial areas, or include endocapillary hypercellularity, crescents, or necrosis.

Class IV – Diffuse proliferative glomerulonephritis

More than 50% of the glomeruli (not including globally sclerotic glomeruli) are hypercellular. This hypercellularity may be limited to mesangial areas, or include endocapillary hypercellularity, crescents, or necrosis.

Class V – Advanced chronic glomerulonephritis

40% or more of the glomeruli are globally sclerotic, and/or there is > 40% estimated tubular atrophy or loss in the cortex. If these criteria are met, the biopsy specimen is graded as class V regardless of other histologic features.

Modified with permission from Elsevier Ltd.©

The latest classification, developed by Koskela et al. in 2017., is the modified semiquantitative classification (SQC). It takes into account no less than 14 variables, evaluating both, the activity and chronicity components making it the most precise and most promising so far [30]. Glomerular, tubular, interstitial and vascular findings are scored and a maximum score is defined as total biopsy score. The scoring system also includes activity index, chronicity index, focal or diffuse mesangial proliferation. Koskela et al. evaluated comparatively the ISKDC and SQC classifications in a national cohort of paediatric HSPN patients. Unfortunately, the number of patients in the original study was far too low (53 patients) to properly validate the classification (Table 4). Although the research showed promising results, according to which the variables of SQC (the total biopsy score and activity index) are better and more sensitive than ISKDC grades in prediction of patient outcome in HSPN, a study of a greater number of patients is needed.
Table 4

Modified semiquantitative classification (according to ref. [30])

Modified SQC



Glomerular changes



0 - 1a

 Mesangial proliferation


0 - 1a




0 - 3b



0 - 3b



0 - 3b

Fibrinous thrombosis


0 - 3b

Global sclerosis


0 - 3b

Segmental sclerosis


0 - 2c

Tubular changes

 Thickening of the basement membrane


0 - 1a

 Complete atrophy


0 - 1a

 Tubular dilatation


0 - 1a

Interstitial changes



0 - 1a

 Inflammation OR periglomerular inflammation


0 - 1a

Capillary changes

 Arteriosclerosis OR arterial inflammation


0 - 1a

Focal or diffuse mesangial proliferation


0 for focal, 1 for diffuse

a0 = absent; 1 = present

b0 = 0% of glomeruli affected; 1 = 0–5% of glomeruli affected; 2 = 5–10% of glomeruli affected; 3= > 10% of glomeruli affected

c0 = 0% of glomeruli affected; 1 = 0–5% of glomeruli affected; 2= > 5% of glomeruli affected

Reproduced with permission from Springer Nature©

Table 5 summarize the most frequently used classifications for histological analysis of renal biopsy findings in HSPN in clinical practice around the world. From this table it is obvious the data about histologic classifications for HSPN from some parts of the world are scarce with surprisingly very few recent studies. It may be noticed there is a considerable number of articles in which different modified or local pathological scoring classification systems are used.
Table 5

Use of the ISKDC, the Oxford and other histological classifications for HSPN in different continents


ISKDC classification

Authors, ref.

Oxford classification

Authors, ref.

Other classifications

Name of classification, authors, ref.


Koskela et al. 2017 [30]

Soylemezoglu et al. 2009 [21]

Lucas Garcia et al. 2009 [47]

Mizerska-Wasiak et al. 2018 [41]

Gülhan et al. 2015 [42]

Calvo-Río et al. 2013 [43]

Modified semiquantitative classification

Koskela et al. 2017 [30]

Local pathological scoring

Mohey et al. 2013 [48]

Pillebout et al. 2002 [49]

The classification developed by Heaton

Altugan et al. 2009 [50]

Classification according to Emancipator

Rauta et al. 2002 [51]

Coppo et al. 1997 [13]

North America

Tarshish et al. 2004 [31]


The classification adapted from Andreoli and Bergstein

Foster et al. 2000 [52]

The classification developed by Heaton

Heaton et al. 1977 [53]

Meadow’s classification

Meadow et al. 1972 [54]

Latin America

Buscatti et al.

2018 [55]

Fuentes et al.

2014 [56]

de Almeida et al. 2007 [57]




Inagaki et al. 2018 [44]

Fu et al. 2016 [58]

Lim et al. 2016


Inagaki et al. 2018 [44]

Xu et al. 2018 [17]

Kim et al. 2014 [35]

Japanese histologic classification

Inagaki et al. 2018 [44]

Scoring system described by Andreoli and Bergstein

Kanai et al. 2011 [59]






Naija et al. 2012 [60]


Histologic classification of Haas

Mitchell et al. 2010 [61]

The correlation between clinical aspects and histopathologic findings in HSPN has been the subject of several studies. Firstly, it was found that the presence, type and number of glomerular crescents in a biopsy specimen has a large role in the prognostic process, detecting a poorer outcome in patients with more than 50% of crescents, which was the basis for forming the ISKDC classification [5, 9, 31, 32]. However, as noted above, other studies did not confirm this finding, perhaps due to an uneven distribution of crescents, too small biopsy specimen, the possibility of spontaneous healing of histological lesions or the fact that patients with crescents were treated more aggressively [10, 21, 33, 34]. Tubulointerstitial lesions were found to positively correlate with a more severe outcome [25, 35, 36]. Furthermore, chronic lesions alongside acute lesions were identified as predictors of poor prognosis [34], where the total biopsy score acquired with the modified SQC differentiated patients with a score of ≤10 points as patients with a favorable outcome and with a score of ≥11 as patients with a greater risk of renal deterioration [30].

What are the problems with the existing classifications of HSPN?

It is necessary to point out several issues regarding the existing classifications of HSPN. Of all the classifications most commonly used in clinical practice as well as for research purposes, it is not known which one predicts the renal outcome in IGAV/HSP and has the strongest association with unfavorable outcome. There are no studies that compare all the most frequently used classifications. This certainly has implications for defining the standardised management since histology is an important point in deciding whom to treat and with which medications. Lupus nephritis is, like HSPN, another inflammatory renal disease, but here the treatment strategies are based on histological classification. This is possible since the classification system in use is associated with severity of renal disease and renal outcome [37, 38]. Although the evidence for treatment of childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis is limited and there is a need for further research, representative rheumatologists and nephrologists managed to reach a consensus [38].

An important problem of classifications for HSPN is that they have not been validated in (sufficiently large numbers of) children or have been validated only in IgA nephropathy. For example, in the recommendations for updating the Oxford Classification the working group clearly accentuated the necessity of inclusion of larger number of children to avoid inadequate statistical power due to the limited number of patients reaching end points [28]. To date only few studies compared clinical and histological features between adults and children with HSPN, and showed that there are differences between these age groups [39]. Although HSPN in adults is a rare disease, a recent study showed that renal pathological chronicity was more serious in adults than in children: approximately 30% of adults with HSPN develop chronic renal failure [39, 40].

Findings from research on IgA nephropathy have been applied also to patients with HSPN. For instance, due to shared clinical, immunological and histological findings between the two diseases, it has been suggested that the Oxford classification can be used in classifying HSPN and it has been used in clinical practice [17, 35, 4145]. Although these two diseases share similar features, there are also clinicopathological differences that are not only the mere presence of extrarenal clinical signs in IGAV/HSP [12, 22]. The most important differences in the clinical presentation of the two diseases are age and clinical signs. While IGAV/HSP has a peak incidence in the age between 4 and 7 years, and HSPN is predominantly seen in childhood, this range for IgA nephropathy is between 15 and 30 years. HSPN patients more often present as nephrotic or nephritic syndrome, whereas in IgA nephropathy such initial presentation is rare. Furthermore, HSPN frequently has an acute onset and course while IgA nephropathy is usually chronic progressive renal disease that gradually leads to renal failure. The risk of ESRD is higher in children with HSPN than in children with IgA nephropathy. Histologically, it should be noted that necrotizing changes and fibrin deposits in the glomerulus as well as endocapillary proliferation and crescents formation are more common in HSPN than in IgA nephropathy. Pathohistological changes in IgA nephropathy are predominantly found in mesangium and gradually lead to glomerulosclerosis and interstitial fibrosis. The main mechanisms of damage in HSPN are glomerular endothelial lesions that may heal or progress to fibrosis with scarring and chronic kidney damage [22]. Although the similarities between HSPN and IgA nephropathy are numerous, differences in clinical manifestation, course of the disease and renal damage mechanisms raise the question of the efficacy of uniform treatment of these two conditions and the possibility of a different therapeutic response to the same treatment [22]. Therefore, all classifications for IgA nephropathy need to be validated in children with HSPN if we intend to apply them in clinical practice or trials.


In conclusion, limited number of children with HSPN and relatively short periods of follow-up increase the need for multicenter multinational prospective studies with joint collaboration between pediatric rheumatologists and nephrologists. It is necessary to raise awareness of the fact that IGAV/HSP can cause renal complications on the long term, even years after episode of purpura or following resolution of urinary abnormalities [7, 9, 10]. Since, patients with IGAV/HSP without renal complications at diagnosis are followed by pediatric rheumatologists or nephrologists, shared efforts are needed to prevent these patients from being lost during the follow-up and to avoid overlooking the kidney disease. It is therefore very important for future studies to observe patients for a long period of time and at regular intervals to include those who have a silent and subtle, insidious progression of the disease as well as patients with relapses [6]. Of great significance remains the need to include in studies early stage patients to detect the risk factors for progression of disease and for chronic renal failure, and to avoid confounding factors caused by treatment and selection bias by including patients with severe renal impairment [17, 46]. Particular attention needs to be devoted to strengthening the cooperation of pediatric rheumatologists, pediatric nephrologists and nephropathologists in different centers aiming at facilitating international exchange of knowledge and data. Consequently, it is of crucial importance that pediatric rheumatologists are also involved in validation of histological classifications in children with HSPN.

Given the fact that not insignificant proportion of the total number of patients with IGAV/HSP will develop renal impairment, we hope that the efforts for finding proper histological classification in HSPN will result in success as has been the case with lupus nephritis.



End-stage renal disease


Henoch-Schönlein purpura


Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis


IgA Vasculitis


International Study of Kidney Disease in Children


Modified semiquantitative classification





No funds to declare.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed to the writing of this report. SO was senior author and MJ was leading author. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

Department of Paediatrics, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
Meyer Children’s Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
Department of Pediatrics, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey


  1. Yang YH, Hung CF, Hsu CR, Wang LC, Chuang YH, Lin YT, et al. A nationwide survey on epidemiological characteristics of childhood Henoch-Schönlein purpura in Taiwan. Rheumatology. 2005;44:618–22.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Gardner-Medwin JM, Dolezalova P, Cummins C, Southwood TR. Incidence of Henoch-Schonlein purpura, Kawasaki disease, and rare vasculitides in children of different ethnic origins. Lancet. 2002;360:1197–202.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Ozen S, Pistorio A, Lusan SM, Bakkaloglu A, Herlin T, Brik R, et al. EULAR/PRINTO/PRES criteria for Henoch-Schonlein purpura, childhood polyarteritis nodosa, childhood Wegener granulomatosis and childhood Takayasu arteritis: Ankara 2008. Part I: overall methodology and clinical characterisation. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69:790–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Eleftheriou D, Batu ED, Ozen S, Brogan PA. Vasculitis in children. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015;30:i94–i103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Pohl M. Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2015;30:245–52.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Davin JC, Coppo R. Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis in children. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2014;10:563–73.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Narchi H. Risk of long term renal impairment and duration of follow up recommended for Henoch-Schonlein purpura with normal or minimal urinary findings: a systematic review. Arch Dis Child. 2005;90:916–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Reid-Adam J. Henoch-Schonlein Purpura. Pediatr Rev. 2014;35:447–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldstein AR, White RHR, Akuse R, Chantler C. Long-term follow-up of childhood Henoch-Schönlein nephritis. Lancet. 1992;339:280–2.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Ronkainen J, Nuutinen M, Koskimies O. The adult kidney 24 years after childhood Henoch-Schonlein purpura: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2002;360:666–70.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaku Y, Nohara K, Honda S. Renal involvement in Henoch-Schönlein purpura: a multivariate analysis of prognostic factors. Kidney Int. 1998;53:1755–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Davin JC, Ten Berge IJ, Weening JJ. What is the difference between IgA nephropathy and Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis? Kidney Int. 2001;59:823–34.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Coppo R, Mazzucco G, Cagnoli L, Lupo A, Schena FP. Long-term prognosis of Henoch-Schönlein nephritis in adults and children. Italian Group of Renal Immunopathology Collaborative Study on Henoch-Schönlein purpura. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1997;12:2277–83.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Schärer K, Krmar R, Querfeld U, Ruder H, Waldherr R, Schaefer F. Clinical outcome of Schönlein-Henoch purpura nephritis in children. Pediatr Nephrol. 1999;13:816–23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Counahan R, Winterborn MH, White RH, Heaton JM, Meadow SR, Bluett NH, et al. Prognosis of Henoch-Schonlein nephritis in children. BMJ. 1977;2:11–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Haas M. IgA nephropathy and Henoch-Schönlein Purpura nephritis. In: Jennette JC, Olson JC, Schwartz MM, Silva FG, editors. editors. Heptinstall’s Pathology of the Kidney. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2007. p. 423–86.Google Scholar
  17. Xu K, Zhang L, Ding J, Wang S, Su B, Xiao H, et al. Value of the Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy in children with Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. J Nephrol. 2018;31:279–86.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Kinoue K, Hattori M, Horita S, Kawaguchi H, Ito K. Crescent formation in children with Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis: a pathological and immunohistochemical study. Nihon Jinzo Gakkai Shi. 1996;38:364–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Davin JC. Henoch-Schönlein Purpura nephritis: pathophysiology, treatment, and future strategy. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6:679–89.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Coppo R, Andrulli S, Amore A, Gianoglio B, Conti G, Peruzzi L, et al. Predictors of outcome in Henoch-Schönlein nephritis in children and adults. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;47:993–1003.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Soylemezoglu O, Ozkaya O, Ozen S, Bakkaloglu A, Dusunsel R, Peru H, et al. Henoch-Schönlein nephritis: a nationwide study. Nephron Clin Pract. 2009;112:199–204.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Davin JC, Coppo R. Pitfalls in recommending evidence-based guidelines for a protean disease like Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2013;28:1897–903.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. Okada H, Suzuki H, Konishi K, Sakaguchi H, Saruta T. Histological alterations in renal specimens as indicators of prognosis of IgA nephropathy. Clin Nephrol. 1992;37:235–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Daniel L, Saingra Y, Giorgi R, Bouvier C, Pellissier JF, Berland Y. Tubular lesions determine prognosis of IgA nephropathy. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000;35:13–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Lim BJ, Shin JI, Choi SE, Rhim H, Lee JS, Kim PK, et al. The significance of tubulointerstitial lesions in childhood Henoch-Schonlein nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2016;31:2087–93.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Roberts ISD, Cook HT, Troyanov S, Alpers CE, Amore A, Barratt J, et al. The Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy: pathology definitions, correlations, and reproducibility. Kidney Int. 2009;76:546–56.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Cattran DC, Coppo R, Cook HT, Feehally J, Roberts ISD, Troyanov S, et al. The Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy: rationale, clinicopathological correlations, and classification. Kidney Int. 2009;76:534–45.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Trimarchi H, Barratt J, Cattran DC, Cook HT, Coppo R, Haas M, et al. Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy 2016: an update from the IgA nephropathy classification working group. Kidney Int. 2017;91:1014–21.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Haas M. Histologic subclassification of IgA nephropathy: a clinicopathologic study of 244 cases. Am J Kidney Dis. 1997;29:829–42.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Koskela M, Ylinen E, Ukonmaanaho E-M, Autio-Harmainen H, Heikkilä P, Lohi J, et al. The ISKDC classification and a new semiquantitative classification for predicting outcomes of Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2017;32:1201–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Tarshish P, Bernstein J, Edelmann CM. Henoch-Schonlein purpura nephritis: course of disease and efficacy of cyclophosphamide. Pediatr Nephrol. 2004;19:51–6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Rai A, Nast C, Adler S. Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1999;10:2637–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ronkainen J, Ala-Houhala M, Huttunen NP, Jahnukainen T, Koskimies O, Ormälä T, et al. Outcome of Henoch-Schoenlein nephritis with nephrotic-range proteinuria. Clin Nephrol. 2003;60:80–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Edström Halling S, Söderberg MP, Berg UB. Predictors of outcome in Henoch-Schonlein nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2010;25:1101–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Kim CH, Lim JB, Bae YS, Kwon YE, Kim YL, Nam KH, et al. Using the Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy to predict long-term outcomes of Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis in adults. Mod Pathol. 2014;27:972–82.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Feng D, Huang WY, Hao S, Niu XL, Wang P, Wu Y, et al. A single-center analysis of Henoch-Schonlein purpura nephritis with nephrotic proteinuria in children. Pediatr Rheumatol. 2017;15:15.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Weening JJ, D’Agati VD, Schwartz MM, Seshan SV, Alpers CE, Appel GB, et al. The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited. Kidney Int. 2004;65:521–30.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Groot N, de Graeff N, Marks SD, Brogan P, Avcin T, Bader-Meunier B, et al. European evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of childhood-onset lupus nephritis: the SHARE initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1965–73.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Lu S, Liu D, Xiao J, Yuan W, Wang X, Zhang X, et al. Comparison between adults and children with Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2015;30:791–6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Fogazzi GB, Pasquali S, Moriggi M, Casanova S, Damilano I, Mihatsch MJ, et al. Long-term outcome of Schönlein-Henoch nephritis in the adult. Clin Nephrol. 1989;31:60–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mizerska-Wasiak M, Gajewski Ł, Cichoń-Kawa K, Małdyk J, Dziedzic-Jankowska K, Leszczyńska B, et al. Serum GDIgA1 levels in children with IgA nephropathy and Henoch-Schönlein nephritis. Cent Eur J Immunol. 2018;43:162–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Gülhan B, Orhan D, Kale G, Besbas N, Özen S. Studying cytokines of T helper cells in the kidney disease of IgA vasculitis (Henoch-Schönlein purpura). Pediatr Nephrol. 2015;30:1269–77.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Calvo-Río V, Loricera J, Martín L, Ortiz-Sanjuán F, Alvarez L, González-Vela MC, et al. Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis and IgA nephropathy: a comparative clinical study. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2013;31:S45–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Inagaki K, Kaihan AB, Hachiya A, Ozeki T, Ando M, Kato S, et al. Clinical impact of endocapillary proliferation according to the Oxford classification among adults with Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. BMC Nephrol. 2018;19:208.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  45. Nasri H. Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy is applicable to predict long-term outcomes of Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis. Iran J Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2014;13:456–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Butani L, Morgenstern BZ. Long-term outcome in children after Henoch-Schonlein purpura nephritis. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2007;46:505–11.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Lucas García J, Alvarez Blanco O, Sanahuja Ibáñez MJ, Ortega López PJ, Zamora MI. Outcome of Henoch-Schönlein nephropathy in pediatric patients. Prognostic factors Nefrologia. 2008;28:627–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Mohey H, Laurent B, Mariat C, Berthoux F. Validation of the absolute renal risk of dialysis/death in adults with IgA nephropathy secondary to Henoch-Schönlein purpura: a monocentric cohort study. BMC Nephrol. 2013;14:169.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  49. Pillebout E, Thervet E, Hill G, Alberti C, Vanhille P, Nochy D. Henoch-Schönlein Purpura in adults: outcome and prognostic factors. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2002;13:1271–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  50. Altugan FS, Ozen S, Aktay-Ayaz N, Güçer S, Topaloğlu R, Düzova A, et al. Treatment of severe Henoch-Schönlein nephritis: justifying more immunosuppression. Turk J Pediatr. 2009;51:551–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Rauta V, Törnroth T, Grönhagen-Riska C. Henoch Schoenlein nephritis in adults: clinical features and outcomes in Finnish patients. Clin Nephrol. 2002;58:1–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  52. Foster BJ, Bernard C, Drummond KN, Sharma AK. Effective therapy for severe Henoch-Schonlein purpura nephritis with prednisone and azathioprine: a clinical and histopathologic study. J Pediatr. 2000;136:370–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  53. Heaton JM, Turner DR, Cameron JS. Localization of glomerular "deposits" in Henoch-Schönlein nephritis. Histopathology. 1977;1:93–104.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  54. Meadow SR, Glasgow EF, White RH, Moncrieff MW, Cameron JS, Ogg CS. Schönlein-Henoch nephritis. Q J Med. 1972;41:241–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Buscatti IM, Casella BB, Aikawa NE, Watanabe A, Farhat SCL, Campos LMA, et al. Henoch-Schönlein purpura nephritis: initial risk factors and outcomes in a Latin American tertiary center. Clin Rheumatol. 2018;37:1319–24.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  56. Fuentes Y, Hernández AM, García-Roca P, Valverde S, Velásquez-Jones LF, Sosa G, et al. Urinary MCP-1/creatinine in Henoch-Schönlein purpura and its relationship with nephritis. Pediatr Nephrol. 2014;29:1047–52.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. de Almeida JL, Campos LM, Paim LB, Leone C, Koch VH, Silva CA. Renal involvement in Henoch-Schönlein purpura: a multivariate analysis of initial prognostic factors. J Pediatr. 2007;83:259–66.Google Scholar
  58. Fu H, Mao J, Huang L, Wang J, Gu W, Lu Z. Higher pathological grading is associated with unfavorable outcome of Henoch-Schonlein purpura nephritis in children. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2016;9:4633–40.Google Scholar
  59. Kanai H, Sawanobori E, Kobayashi A, Matsushita K, Sugita K, Higashida K. Early treatment with methylprednisolone pulse therapy combined with tonsillectomy for heavy Proteinuric Henoch-Schönlein Purpura nephritis in children. Nephron Extra. 2011;1:101–11.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  60. Naija O, Bouzaraa J, Goucha-Louzir R, Lakhoua MR. Predictive factors of severe Henoch-Schonlein nephritis in children: report of 34 cases. Tunis Med. 2012;90:878–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Mitchell JG, Kala UK, Hahn D. Descriptive study of biopsy proven IgA and Henoch Schonlein Purpura (HSP) nephropathy in two government hospitals in Johannesburg, South Africa. Pediatr Nephrol. 2010;25:1806.Google Scholar


© The Author(s). 2019