Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP · 2011
Current concepts of immunofluorescence in oral mucocutaneous diseases.
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.
Anuradha Ch, Malathi N, Anandan S, Magesh Kt
Аннотация
AIM: To study the immunofluorescence pattern and to assess its reliability as a confirmatory diagnostic test in patients with pemphigus, pemphigoid, lichen planus, and lupus erythematosus and also to assess the disease activity by indirect immunofluorscence (IIF) in patients with pemphigus only.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients were included in the study group, out of which, 6 patients were clinically and histopathologically diagnosed as pemphigus, completely free of active lesions were subjected to IIF only to assess the disease activity and were grouped separately. Based on the clinical and provisional diagnosis, the remaining 20 patients who had active lesions were subjected to direct immunofluorscence (DIF) and IIF and were divided into four groups. Biopsy specimens were taken from the periphery of the lesions and were examined by both conventional light microscopic and DIF methods. Five milliliters of venous blood was collected from each patient and were subjected to IIF.
RESULTS: Histopathological diagnosis was consistent with direct immunofluorescence study in 15 cases (75%). The various immunofluorescence patterns observed in our study were consistent with those described by various authors in standard textbooks and articles.
CONCLUSION: Histopathology remains gold standard for most of the diseases, it is recognized from this study that not all lesions are amenable to definitive histopathological diagnosis thus; DIF can provide a valuable additional criterion in diagnosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients were included in the study group, out of which, 6 patients were clinically and histopathologically diagnosed as pemphigus, completely free of active lesions were subjected to IIF only to assess the disease activity and were grouped separately. Based on the clinical and provisional diagnosis, the remaining 20 patients who had active lesions were subjected to direct immunofluorscence (DIF) and IIF and were divided into four groups. Biopsy specimens were taken from the periphery of the lesions and were examined by both conventional light microscopic and DIF methods. Five milliliters of venous blood was collected from each patient and were subjected to IIF.
RESULTS: Histopathological diagnosis was consistent with direct immunofluorescence study in 15 cases (75%). The various immunofluorescence patterns observed in our study were consistent with those described by various authors in standard textbooks and articles.
CONCLUSION: Histopathology remains gold standard for most of the diseases, it is recognized from this study that not all lesions are amenable to definitive histopathological diagnosis thus; DIF can provide a valuable additional criterion in diagnosis.