A Comparative Study of Immunohistochemistry and Electron Microscopy Used in the Diagnosis of Epidermolysis Bullosa
- 1 June 2003
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in The American Journal of Dermatopathology
- Vol. 25 (3) , 198-203
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00000372-200306000-00003
Abstract
Electron microscopic examination still is the gold standard for classifying epidermolysis bullosa, although it is relatively expensive, time consuming, and not readily available. Immunoreagents have been developed recently to map antigens in the basement membrane on routinely processed specimens. The current study was performed to examine the diagnostic usefulness of immunohistochemistry, as compared with electron microscopic examination, for analyzing routine formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections of epidermolysis bullosa. This study investigated 39 consecutively diagnosed cases of epidermolysis bullosa in which both electron microscopic examination and immunohistochemistry were used. In each case, three monoclonal antibodies were used to stain for laminin 1, collagen IV, and keratin. The immunohistochemical patterns were defined as follows: epidermolysis bullosa simplex (laminin, collagen IV, or both at the dermal floor of the blister and keratin at both the dermal floor and the epidermal roof), junctional epidermolysis bullosa (laminin, collagen IV, or both at the dermal floor of the blister and keratin only at the epidermal roof), and dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (collagen IV, laminin, or both, and keratin all at the epidermal roof). Altogether, electron microscopic examination subclassified epidermolysis bullosa into its three major forms in 37 of the 39 cases (95%), and immunohistochemistry in 33 of the 39 cases (85%). All of the classifiable cases were concordant. Specifically, immunohistochemistry was diagnostic in 10 of 14 (71%) epidermolysis bullosa simplex cases, 14 of 14 (100%) junctional epidermolysis bullosa cases, and 9 of 11 (82%) dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa cases. The most frequent cause for inconclusive immunohistochemical results was failure in staining of the basement membrane with the antibodies to both laminin and collagen IV. In conclusion, the use of immunohistochemistry on routinely processed specimens may be useful for subclassifying epidermolysis bullosa into its major forms in the majority of the cases, although it still cannot fully replace electron microscopic examination or immunofluorescence mapping in the diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Junctional epidermolysis bullosa associated with congenital localized absence of skin, and pyloric atresia in two newborn siblingsJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2001
- Revised classification system for inherited epidermolysis bullosa: Report of the Second International Consensus Meeting on diagnosis and classification of epidermolysis bullosaJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2000
- Immunohistopathologic Diagnosis of Epidermolysis BullosaThe American Journal of Dermatopathology, 1999
- Delayed postburn blisters: an immunohistochemical and ultrastructural studyJournal of Cutaneous Pathology, 1997
- Mode of c-myc protein expression in Spitz nevi, common melanocytic nevi and malignant melanomasJournal of Cutaneous Pathology, 1997
- Loss of plectin causes epidermolysis bullosa with muscular dystrophy: cDNA cloning and genomic organization.Genes & Development, 1996
- Revised clinical and laboratory criteria for subtypes of inherited epidermolysis bullosaJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 1991
- Clinicopathologic types of epidermolysis bullosa and their nondermatological complicationsArchives of Dermatology, 1988
- Histopathologic and ultrastructural findings in certain genodermatosesClinics in Dermatology, 1985
- Studies on the Pathogenesis of Epidermolysis Bullosa**From the Section of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago 37, Illinois.Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 1962