Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology · 2006
A simple method for the evaluation of epidermal thickness variations in psoriasis vulgaris.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Demiriz Murat, Kurumlu Zafer, Celasun Bülent, Günhan Omer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the "variation" of the epidermal thickness and variables such as the mean, maximum, and minimum thickness for the diagnosis and follow-up of some skin diseases such as psoriasis.
STUDY DESIGN: A simple quantitative method is described. A series of psoriasis vulgaris cases is provided as an example. Biopsy samples taken before and after topical treatment were used.
RESULTS: The mean thickness was higher in lesions compared to the perilesional control skin (p < 0.001) and post-treatment lesional area (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The thickness of the epidermis varies due to a multitude of factors. Measuring the mean epidermal thickness may be important. However, this measurement may not be the best way for studies involving a series of patients and a variety of lesion sites. The natural variations in the thickness of the epidermis of different body sites and of different persons may prevent the usage of thickness measurements alone on a wider scale. It is hoped that this method can be used for evaluation of certain skin diseases affecting epidermal thickness where variation of the epidermal thickness is a potentially useful diagnostic and therapeutic variable.
STUDY DESIGN: A simple quantitative method is described. A series of psoriasis vulgaris cases is provided as an example. Biopsy samples taken before and after topical treatment were used.
RESULTS: The mean thickness was higher in lesions compared to the perilesional control skin (p < 0.001) and post-treatment lesional area (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The thickness of the epidermis varies due to a multitude of factors. Measuring the mean epidermal thickness may be important. However, this measurement may not be the best way for studies involving a series of patients and a variety of lesion sites. The natural variations in the thickness of the epidermis of different body sites and of different persons may prevent the usage of thickness measurements alone on a wider scale. It is hoped that this method can be used for evaluation of certain skin diseases affecting epidermal thickness where variation of the epidermal thickness is a potentially useful diagnostic and therapeutic variable.