Histoid leprosy: clinical and histopathological analysis of patients in follow-up in University Clinical Hospital of endemic country

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
10
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2018
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
WILEY
Citação
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, v.57, n.6, p.707-712, 2018
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
BackgroundHistoid leprosy (HL) is a rare form of lepromatous leprosy, characterized by hyperchromic indurated nodules above normal skin. Its main histopathological aspect is spindle cells. Because it may simulate other aspects, such as dermatofibroma and neurofibroma, histoid leprosy poses itself as a diagnostic challenge. MethodsThis is a retrospective study with all patients having been selected from the leprosy clinic of the Hospital das Clinicas da Universidade de SAo Paulo from 2006 to 2016. ResultsThere were 12 patients in this study, eight in the histoid group and four in the lepromatous leprosy group. The prevalence of HL was 1.12% in all leprosy subjects. All individuals from HL group were de novo cases, and the histopathological analysis of skin lesions presented spindle cells generating a storiform pattern. Immunohistochemistry for CD68, vimentin, and anti-BCG were positive in all 12 cases. Factor XIIIa was visualized only in the papillary dermis, and S100 protein was negative in all biopsies. Smooth-muscle actin was present in 62.5% of the HL samples. ConclusionThe prevalence of HL was similar to previous reports. However, all histoid patients were de novo cases, differing from published studies. Fusocellular macrophage transformation could be explained by the differences in cytoskeleton proteins expressed in histoid lesions in comparison to other leprosy variants, with emphasis on vimentin and smooth muscle actin.
Palavras-chave
Referências
  1. ABENOZA P, 1993, AM J DERMATOPATH, V15, P429, DOI 10.1097/00000372-199310000-00003
  2. da Costa DAM, 2013, LEPROSY REV, V84, P176
  3. Eligini S, 2015, J PROTEOMICS, V124, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.jprot.2015.03.026
  4. Gupta SK, 2015, INT J DERMATOL, V54, P1283, DOI 10.1111/ijd.12799
  5. Kalla G, 2000, INT J LEPROSY, V68, P267
  6. Kaur I, 2009, BRIT J DERMATOL, V160, P305, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2008.08899.x
  7. Lastoria JC, 2012, OCORRENCIA ERITEMA N
  8. Lee SH, 2010, MOL CELLS, V29, P311, DOI 10.1007/s10059-010-0053-8
  9. Mendiratta V, 2011, J INFECT DEV COUNTR, V5, P128
  10. Mor-Vaknin N, 2003, NAT CELL BIOL, V5, P59, DOI 10.1038/ncb901
  11. Nair SP, 2013, INT J DERMATOL, V52, P580, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2012.05753.x
  12. Pereyra SB, 2007, INT J DERMATOL, V46, P944, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2007.03233.x
  13. Alves JVP, 2014, AN BRAS DERMATOL, V89, P472, DOI 10.1590/abd1806-4841.20142629
  14. Rodriguez FJ, 2012, ACTA NEUROPATHOL, V123, P295, DOI 10.1007/s00401-012-0954-z
  15. SEHGAL VN, 1985, LEPROSY REV, V56, P27
  16. Voorend CGN, 2013, PLOS NEGLECT TROP D, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002440
  17. WADE H W, 1963, Int J Lepr, V31, P129