TY - JOUR
T1 - Histopathologic features distinguishing secondary syphilis from its mimickers
AU - Flamm, Alexandra
AU - Alcocer, Veronica Merelo
AU - Kazlouskaya, Viktoryia
AU - Kwon, Eun Ji
AU - Elston, Dirk
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.
PY - 2020/1
Y1 - 2020/1
N2 - Background: Syphilis is often misdiagnosed clinically, and biopsies might be required. Objective: To determine histopathologic features that distinguish secondary syphilis from pityriasis lichenoides (PL), pityriasis rosea (PR), and early mycosis fungoides (MF). Methods: Histopathologic features of 100 cases of syphilis, 110 cases of PL, 72 cases of PR, and 101 cases of MF were compared. Results: Elongated rete ridges and interstitial inflammation favor syphilis over PL (likelihood ratios 3.44 and 2.72, respectively), but no feature reliably distinguishes between them. Secondary syphilis and PR can be distinguished by neutrophils in the stratum corneum, plasma cells, interface dermatitis with lymphocytes and vacuoles, and lymphocytes with ample cytoplasm. Plasma cells and lymphocytes with ample cytoplasm are rare in early MF and can be used as distinguishing features. Conclusions: Histopathologic features characteristic of syphilis can be seen in PL, PR, and early MF. Distinguishing syphilis from PL can be difficult histologically, and a high index of suspicion is required. Although elongation of rete and interstitial inflammation favor syphilis, plasma cells (historically considered a significant feature of syphilis) are often encountered in PL. Vacuolar interface dermatitis with a lymphocyte in every vacuole is considered characteristic of PL, but this feature appears to be more common in syphilis.
AB - Background: Syphilis is often misdiagnosed clinically, and biopsies might be required. Objective: To determine histopathologic features that distinguish secondary syphilis from pityriasis lichenoides (PL), pityriasis rosea (PR), and early mycosis fungoides (MF). Methods: Histopathologic features of 100 cases of syphilis, 110 cases of PL, 72 cases of PR, and 101 cases of MF were compared. Results: Elongated rete ridges and interstitial inflammation favor syphilis over PL (likelihood ratios 3.44 and 2.72, respectively), but no feature reliably distinguishes between them. Secondary syphilis and PR can be distinguished by neutrophils in the stratum corneum, plasma cells, interface dermatitis with lymphocytes and vacuoles, and lymphocytes with ample cytoplasm. Plasma cells and lymphocytes with ample cytoplasm are rare in early MF and can be used as distinguishing features. Conclusions: Histopathologic features characteristic of syphilis can be seen in PL, PR, and early MF. Distinguishing syphilis from PL can be difficult histologically, and a high index of suspicion is required. Although elongation of rete and interstitial inflammation favor syphilis, plasma cells (historically considered a significant feature of syphilis) are often encountered in PL. Vacuolar interface dermatitis with a lymphocyte in every vacuole is considered characteristic of PL, but this feature appears to be more common in syphilis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075513297&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075513297&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.07.011
DO - 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.07.011
M3 - Article
C2 - 31306731
AN - SCOPUS:85075513297
SN - 0190-9622
VL - 82
SP - 156
EP - 160
JO - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
JF - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
IS - 1
ER -