Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41863863›Full record

ReviewAnais brasileiros de dermatologia

Laboratory and functional tests in leprosy diagnosis: a practical guide for clinical decision-making.

Luis Alberto Ribeiro Fróes, Mirian Nacagami Sotto, João Avancini, José Antônio Garbino, Maria Ângela Bianconcini Trindade

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Anais brasileiros de dermatologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Luis Alberto Ribeiro FróesDepartment of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Electronic address: lulafroes@usp.br.
Mirian Nacagami SottoDepartment of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil; Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil; Instituto de Medicina Tropical, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
João AvanciniDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
José Antônio GarbinoArea of Clinical Neurophysiology, Instituto Lauro de Souza Lima, Bauru, SP, Brazil.
Maria Ângela Bianconcini TrindadeDepartment of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil; Instituto de Medicina Tropical, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early diagnosis of leprosy remains primarily clinical, based on recognition of skin lesions with altered sensation and peripheral nerve involvement. However, complementary tests play crucial roles in confirming uncertain cases, guiding operational classification, detecting subclinical neural involvement, and distinguishing late reactions from relapse. This review synthesizes the practical application of diagnostic methods available to dermatologists. Slit-skin smear microscopy demonstrates high specificity but limited sensitivity in paucibacillary forms, while histopathology reveals the characteristic immunopathological spectrum, with perineural acid-fast bacilli being pathognomonic for leprosy. Molecular detection by PCR enhances diagnosis in paucibacillary cases (34%‒80% sensitivity) but cannot distinguish viable from non-viable bacilli, limiting its utility in post-treatment assessment. Anti-PGL-1 serology aids contact surveillance, with seropositive individuals showing 3.5-fold increased risk of developing disease, though sensitivity remains below 30% in tuberculoid forms. For neural evaluation, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing provides a standardized tactile threshold assessment, while the histamine test maps autonomic dysfunction, particularly valuable in indeterminate forms. Electrodiagnostic studies reveal early subclinical changes and monitor reaction-related neural deterioration. Peripheral nerve ultrasonography demonstrates superior sensitivity over palpation for detecting thickening (97.4% vs. 30% concordance) and identifies inflammatory activity through Doppler assessment. When evaluating post-treatment complications, an integrated approach combining bacteriological index trajectory, histopathological patterns, PCR cycle threshold values, and serological trends enables reliable differentiation between therapeutic failure, late reactions, and relapse. No single laboratory test confirms early leprosy in isolation; clinical dermato-neurological expertise remains paramount, with complementary tests interpreted within the epidemiological context to optimize diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic decisions.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingLeprosyBacilloscopyEarly DiagnosisHumansMycobacterium lepraeSensitivity and SpecificityDiagnosisDiagnostic techniques and proceduresLeprosyMycobacterium lepraePeripheral nervous system diseasesUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID41863863
PMCPMC13022679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.