Journal of cutaneous pathology · 2018
Lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia cannot be differentiated by histopathology.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gálvez-Canseco Aldo, Sperling Leonard
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lichen planopilaris (LPP) and frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) represent 2 entities that cause primary cicatricial alopecia. These entities are clinically different; nevertheless, the literature suggests that FFA represents a form of LPP. The main argument in support of this hypothesis is that previous studies comparing the histologic findings have not found obvious differences between these diseases.
METHODS: Our objective was to more critically compare and contrast 20 histologic findings of these diseases in a large number of patients in order to determine any significant histologic differences between LPP and FFA.
RESULTS: We found 3 parameters that were statistically different, namely the presence of terminal catagen-telogen hairs (50% FFA vs 23.5% LPP; P = .020); a severe perifollicular inflammatory infiltrate (29.4% LPP vs 4.6% FFA; P = .010) and a zone of concentric lamellar fibroplasia (85.3% LPP vs 63.6% FFA; P = .041).
CONCLUSIONS: Although a few histologic features differ between FFA and LPP, we believe that these differences are too subtle or non-specific to distinguish between them with confidence. Therefore, clinical correlation is essential to establish the diagnosis.
METHODS: Our objective was to more critically compare and contrast 20 histologic findings of these diseases in a large number of patients in order to determine any significant histologic differences between LPP and FFA.
RESULTS: We found 3 parameters that were statistically different, namely the presence of terminal catagen-telogen hairs (50% FFA vs 23.5% LPP; P = .020); a severe perifollicular inflammatory infiltrate (29.4% LPP vs 4.6% FFA; P = .010) and a zone of concentric lamellar fibroplasia (85.3% LPP vs 63.6% FFA; P = .041).
CONCLUSIONS: Although a few histologic features differ between FFA and LPP, we believe that these differences are too subtle or non-specific to distinguish between them with confidence. Therefore, clinical correlation is essential to establish the diagnosis.