Abstract
Attempts have been made to establish discriminative criteria between classic calciphylaxis (CPX) and those cases in which cutaneous vascular calcification (CVC) represents an incidental finding (epiphenomenon). Retrospective, observational cohort study of patients with CVC to distinguish clinicopathological features between CVC as classic CPX (CVC in cutaneous lesions with erythematous-violaceous plaques with or without ulceration) or as an epiphenomenon (CVC in cutaneous lesions with known diagnosis). Different clinicopathological parameters and the presence of perieccrine calcification and pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE)-like changes were evaluated. Sixty-six patients were studied. The CPX group showed a significantly higher percentage of renal failure, hypertension, altered laboratory parameters, painful lesions, and mortality rate. Histopathologically, the CPX group was associated with more than one vessel per field involved with subintimal concentric calcification and perieccrine calcification (observed exclusively in the CPX group), while PXE-like changes, although more frequent in the CPX group, were also observed in the epiphenomenon group. Perieccrine calcification and the presence of more than one vessel per field involved by concentric pattern calcification could be used as a diagnostic marker of CPX. Although PXE-like changes are not an exclusive marker, they could suggest CPX diagnosis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
