Affiliation:
1. From the Department of Pathology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Dr Al-Mohammedi); and
2. the Department of Pathology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (Drs Crawford and Martinka).
Abstract
Context.—Biopsy of the face is rarely done for inflammatory skin diseases, unless the entire process is confined to the face.
Objective.—We hypothesized that facial dermatitis has a differential diagnosis that is more limited than the differential diagnosis of inflammatory skin diseases that affect other parts of the body. To our knowledge, the classification of inflammatory skin diseases occurring on the face has never been conducted before in the English literature.
Design.—The most-recent 100 facial biopsies of inflammatory skin conditions were retrieved from our files, and the cases were categorized into the main inflammatory skin patterns.
Results.—Forty-seven cases (47%) were categorized as interface dermatitis, 2 cases (2%) as psoriasiform dermatitis, 11 cases (11%) as spongiotic dermatitis, 16 cases (16%) as diffuse and nodular dermatitis, 8 cases (8%) as perivascular dermatitis, 14 cases (14%) as folliculitis and perifolliculitis, 1 case (1%) as panniculitis, and 1 case (1%) as fibrosing dermatitis. The number of diagnostic entities represented within each of these patterns was small.
Conclusions.—We believe that facial dermatitis should have its own more-circumscribed differential diagnosis. From a practical viewpoint, many of the inflammatory skin diseases that affect other parts of the body should be excluded from the differential diagnosis after the tissue is determined to be from a facial skin biopsy, and others should not be considered unless the biopsy is from the face.
Publisher
Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Subject
Medical Laboratory Technology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献