We have located links that may give you full text access.
Evaluation Studies
Journal Article
Direct immunofluorescence in cutaneous vesiculobullous lesions.
Indian Journal of Pathology & Microbiology 2007 October
UNLABELLED: Direct Immunofluorescence (DIF) is invaluable in the diagnosis of cutaneous vesiculobullous lesions (VBL). It is limited by technical factors and disease nature. 1) To record the sensitivity of DIF in VBL 2) To correlate DIF with clinical, histologic findings and analyse discrepancies.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 100 DIFs on suspected VBL of skin. DIF, histology and clinical data were reviewed. 73/100 cases showed DIF patterns concordant with clinical/histologic diagnosis. The sensitivity of DIF was 88% in Pemphigus group (39/ 44), 82% in Bullous Pemphigoid (BP) (23/28), and 20% in Dermatitis Herpetiformis (DH) (1/5).18 cases of histologically proven VBL were negative and of these, 4 had no epidermis. The remaining 9 cases were discordant with clinical/histologic features, including 4 BP and 5 DH, whose histology was non-specific and will be discussed in detail. One case of DH showed an aberrant vasculitic pattern. DIF is of great value in the diagnosis of VBL, specially in clinical/histologic dilemmas. In DH, neither biopsy nor DIF were very useful and response to therapy was the standard. Sampling errors contributed to false negative results. Proper selection of cases and judicious use are mandatory to optimize its' utility.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 100 DIFs on suspected VBL of skin. DIF, histology and clinical data were reviewed. 73/100 cases showed DIF patterns concordant with clinical/histologic diagnosis. The sensitivity of DIF was 88% in Pemphigus group (39/ 44), 82% in Bullous Pemphigoid (BP) (23/28), and 20% in Dermatitis Herpetiformis (DH) (1/5).18 cases of histologically proven VBL were negative and of these, 4 had no epidermis. The remaining 9 cases were discordant with clinical/histologic features, including 4 BP and 5 DH, whose histology was non-specific and will be discussed in detail. One case of DH showed an aberrant vasculitic pattern. DIF is of great value in the diagnosis of VBL, specially in clinical/histologic dilemmas. In DH, neither biopsy nor DIF were very useful and response to therapy was the standard. Sampling errors contributed to false negative results. Proper selection of cases and judicious use are mandatory to optimize its' utility.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app