ArticleDermatology practical & conceptual2022
Diagnostic Role of Direct Immunofluorescence Assay in Determining The Etiology of Erythroderma: Experience in a Tertiary Referral Hospital.
Article in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Erythroderma is a life-threatening dermatologic emergency which is characterized by diffuse erythema and exfoliation affecting more than 90% of the body surface area. Most common cutaneous diseases associated with erythroderma are systemic contact dermatitis, psoriasis, drug eruption and atopic dermatitis. Clinical-pathological correlation is used to determine the underlying disease. In addition, direct immunofluorescence (DIF) may provide significant clues for etiology of erythroderma especially in the case of autoimmune bullous skin diseases (ABSDs). Objectives: In our study, we aimed to analyze the demographic data, clinical pre-diagnoses, final diagnosis, histopathological and DIF examination findings, accompanying systemic signs and laboratory abnormalities of erythrodermic patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 31 erythroderma patients in a referral hospital between 2014 and 2021. Cutaneous biopsies were taken from all patients for H&E and DIF examination. Results: Average age was 54.6 ± 23 years, 48.4% of the patients were female (N = 15) whereas 51.6 % of the patients were male (N = 16). Average time between the onset of rash and biopsy was 18.8 days. DIF analysis showed immune deposits in 19.4% (N = 6) of the patients; whereas no immune deposits were detected in 80.6% (N = 25) of the patients. The most frequent final diagnosis was adverse cutaneous drug eruption followed by ABSDs. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that DIF may be used in conjunction with clinical-pathologic and clinical findings to reveal the associated skin diseases in erythrodermic patients. Erythrodermic patients presenting with clinical findings of ABSD should be considered for DIF examination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.