Abstract
Introduction: History and characteristic examination findings are often sufficient to diagnose cutaneous lichen planus. Although lichen planus has distinctive clinical features, the diagnosis may present a problem due to variations in clinical pattern. Skin biopsy may be useful to confirm the diagnosis and is of ten required in a typical presentation. In all cases, it is important to consider the possibility of the eruption being drug induced. Lichen planus is not an infectious disease. Aim: Main aim of this study was to correlate clinical features with histopathologic study in all clinically diagnosed and suspected cases of lichen planus and to know its clinical and histopathological variants and assess the clinical versus the pathological agreement in diagnosis. Materials and methods: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted with clinico pathological examination of skin biopsy specimens in the Department of Pathology, Vydehi institute of medical sciences and research centre over a period of 2 years between 2010–2012. Statistical analysis: This study demonstrated no significant association between variants of LP and sex of the patient (p> 0.05) with χ2 = 5.92, 0.05< p< 0.10 using the probability level (alpha) and degree of freedom (df=1). Results: 60 cases of lichen planus were studied. 49 cases were confirmed on histological examination.11 cases were diagnosed only on histology. Maximum number of cases occurred in the age group of 18 - 50 years.Males were affected more commonly than females. Conclusion: The possibility of this lesion to turn malignant justifies the importance of long term follow up for patients with such disease. Clinico pathological correlation is the key to confirm the diagnosis for further patient care and treatment.
Highlights
History and characteristic examination findings are often sufficient to diagnose cutaneous lichen planus
The study population included both male and female patients aged between 18- 65yrs who were clinically diagnosed of Lichen Planus and lichen planus like eruptions from the department of Dermatology, VIMS and RC
Out of the 60 cases, 37 (61.6%) cases were of classical lichen planus, 8(13.3%) cases were of hypertrophic lichen planus, 5(8.3%) cases were of lichen planus pigmentosus, 4(6.6%) cases were of actinic lichen planus, 3(5%) cases were of eruptive lichen planus, 1(1.6%) case each of atrophic lichen planus, annular lichen planus and lichen planus of buccal mucosa [Table: 1]
Summary
History and characteristic examination findings are often sufficient to diagnose cutaneous lichen planus. Lichen planus has distinctive clinical features, the diagnosis may present a problem due to variations in clinical pattern. Skin biopsy may be useful to confirm the diagnosis and is of ten required in a typical presentation. It is important to consider the possibility of the eruption being drug induced. Aim: Main aim of this study was to correlate clinical features with histopathologic study in all clinically diagnosed and suspected cases of lichen planus and to know its clinical and histopathological variants and assess the clinical versus the pathological agreement in diagnosis. Results: 60 cases of lichen planus were studied. 49 cases were confirmed on histological examination. Clinico pathological correlation is the key to confirm the diagnosis for further patient care and treatment. Eruption maybe localized or extensive and Koebner’s phenomenon is commonly seen
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
