Poikiloderma of Civatte: a clinical and epidemiological study.

BACKGROUND

Although a common dermatosis, idiopathic poikiloderma of the face and neck has not been studied in depth for decades.

OBJECTIVES

To reassess the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of poikiloderma of Civatte (PC).

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients with PC. Evaluation included history taking and physical examination. Epidemiological and clinical parameters were recorded and analysed. The literature from 1923 until today, was reviewed thoroughly.

RESULTS

The frequency of PC among dermatologic patients was estimated to be 1.4%. There were 34 females (68%) and 16 males in the present study. The mean age at diagnosis was 47.8 years for females and 61.7 years for males. The majority (88%) had skin phototype II or III. Among females, 26 were at their peri-menopausal stage, including three cases of iatrogenic menopause. Four patients reported that other blood-related family members also had PC. The v and the sides of the neck and the upper chest were most often affected in a symmetric distribution. The face (preauricular and parotid region) was involved in 19 patients (38%). The erythemato-telangiectatic clinical type predominated (58%), followed by the mixed (22%) and the pigmented type (20%). Almost half of the patients (46%) were symptomatic (itching, burning and 'flushing'). The mean duration from onset to diagnosis was 6.2 years according to the patients' report. The course was usually slowly progressive (82%) and irreversible.

CONCLUSIONS

PC shows characteristic features, supporting the theory that it represents a distinct entity. It is rather common in Greece. Although menopausal women predominated in our cohort, men were not uncommonly affected and were diagnosed at an older age. Based on the predominating clinical feature, PC can be classified into three clinical forms. Symmetry and sparing of the anatomically shaded areas of the neck are highly characteristic for PC. Face involvement was not as common and as severe as it had been considered in the past. Recognition of clinical type is important for the selection of the most appropriate treatment, which, despite the advent of novel modalities, remains problematic.