ABSTRACT
Background: Vesiculobullous disorders (VBDs) are extant with diverse clinical manifestations. Vesicles and bullae are fluid-filled cavities present within or beneath the epidermis. They are autoimmune blistering disorders in which autoantibodies are directed against target antigens present in the epidermis and dermo-epidermal junction. Objective: Evaluation of the various clinicodemographic profile of patients with a pattern of distribution (subtypes) of VBDs of the skin and assess the association between clinical aspects and histological changes in vesiculobullous lesions of the skin. Materials and Methods: The study material constituted 93 cases of VBDs out of 936 skin biopsies reported over two and a half years (January 2016 to June 2018) from the tertiary care center. A detailed history of the patients was taken, and a complete physical and dermatological examination with findings including clinical diagnosis was recorded. Histopathological examination (incisional/excisional/punch biopsy) was done in each case. The clinico-demographic evaluation was done and the results were correlated with histopathological findings. Results: Vesiculobullous lesions constituted 10.06% of all skin biopsies. The majority of cases were of pemphigus vulgaris (PV) 30 (32.25%) followed by 16 (17.2%) of bullous pemphigoid. In 83 cases (89.24%) histopathology findings were consistent with clinical diagnosis. Out of 34 cases that were diagnosed clinically as PV , the histopathological study proved 30 cases (88.23%) as PV. Conclusion: Vesiculobullous lesions of the skin are a heterogeneous group of disorders. It is essential to differentiate each pattern of subtype based on clinical examination and histopathological findings. Histopathological diagnosis with clinical correlation plays a major role in arriving at the diagnosis.
ABSTRACT
Background: Leprosy remains an important health problem mainly in the African and South-East Asia regions. Type 1 reaction is an immune-mediated phenomenon known to complicate at least 30% of patients of leprosy. Diagnosing type 1 reaction correctly is important for timely institution of therapy to prevent and treat neuropathy-associated disability and morbidity. There is paucity of literature on definitive criteria for histologic diagnosis of type 1 reaction. This study was conducted to determine the key histologic variables for diagnosing type 1 reaction. Methods: This was a prospective study recruiting 104 patients with borderline leprosy. Three pathologists blinded to the clinical diagnosis independently assessed the cases. The agreement between each histological variable and clinical diagnosis was then calculated by using Cohen's kappa (Κ) coefficient. Results: Histological diagnosis of type 1 reaction was given to 27 (67.5%) of 40 clinically diagnosed cases of type 1reaction cases. Histological variables chosen as key variables for histological diagnosis of type 1 reaction were presence of giant cells, dermal edema, intragranuloma edema, granuloma fraction 31-50%, and presence of medium to large giant cells. Conclusion: This study has shown that T1R are still underdiagnosed histologically in comparison with clinical assessments. The key variables for diagnosing type 1 reaction were proposed
Subject(s)
Adult , Apoptosis , Biopsy , Case-Control Studies , Edema/pathology , Female , Giant Cells/pathology , Granuloma/pathology , Humans , Leprosy, Borderline/pathology , Male , Prospective Studies , Skin/pathologyABSTRACT
Skin scrapings obtained from the lesions of leprosy patients of all types showed 96% positivity to the serum antibody competition test using monoclonal antibody (ML04)to 35 kDa antigen of Mycobacterium leprae. Further, in vitro culture of full thickness skin biopsies from lepromatous patients were noted to release IgG antibodies to M. leprae with a peak antibody response at 48 h. The significance of this local antibody response to Μ. leprae in skin has been discussed for its possible use in diagnosing early leprosy.