The discriminative role of PROX‐1 immunohistochemistry between venous malformation and lymphatic malformation of the deep type with no visible diagnostic surface skin lesion

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundVenous malformations (VMs) are distinguished from lymphatic malformations (LMs) when specific diagnostic skin lesions are present. In the deep type, this is difficult by clinico‐radiologic evaluation alone. We aimed to investigate the usefulness of lymphatic vessel endothelial cell (LEC) markers for the differential diagnosis of the deep VMs and LMs.MethodsA retrospective study was conducted based on the medical records of patients with VMs and LMs who underwent biopsy with both D2‐40 and PROX‐1 immunohistochemistry. We compared the initial clinico‐radiological diagnosis with the final pathological diagnosis and identified which ones showed a difference.ResultsFrom 261 patients who had VMs and LMs, 111 remained after the exclusion of those who showed definite surface diagnostic features. After pathological diagnosis with the expressions of D2‐40 and PROX‐1, 38 of 111 (34.2%) patients' final diagnoses were changed. Among these 38 cases, diagnosis was not changed by D2‐40 positivity alone, but changed by PROX‐1 positivity alone (52.6%) or by both (47.4%). The diagnostic changes were more frequent in the deep category (43.7%) than in the superficial category.ConclusionsIdentifying the expression of D2‐40, and especially PROX‐1, in the differential diagnosis of VMs and LMs may provide important treatment guidelines and understanding their natural course.