Optimizing random skin biopsies: a review of techniques and indications for intravascular large B-cell lymphoma
Rattachement africain : jp. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Intravascular large B-cell lymphoma (IVLBCL), a rare subtype of malignant lymphoma, is diagnosed by observation of intravascular proliferation of tumor cells in samples taken from affected organs. However, diagnosis of IVLBCL is usually difficult due to the lack of mass formation. IVLBCL may be fatal when the diagnosis is delayed, so an accurate early diagnosis is the key to successful treatment. Random skin biopsy (RSB), in which specimens are sampled from normal-appearing skin, has been reported as useful. However, the specific method of RSB remains controversial, with individual institutions using either the punch method or the incisional method. Research has shown that the incisional method has higher sensitivity than the punch method. We discuss whether this difference might owe to the collection of punch specimens from an insufficient depth and whether the punch method might result in false negatives. For RSB, we recommend taking specimens not only from normal-appearing skin, but also from any lesional skin, because lesions may reflect micro IVLBCL lesions. To ensure accurate diagnosis, both dermatologists and hematologists should know the proper method of RSB. This review summarizes the appropriate biopsy method and sites for RSB.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Optimizing random skin biopsies: a review of techniques and indications for intravascular large B-cell lymphoma
- Date Crossref
- 02/04/2024
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.