Details
Category: Volume 05 Issue 10 October 2017
Hits: 1427

Title: Histopathological Study of Skin Biopsies from Clinically Diagnosed Leprosy Patients – 1 yr Institutional Study

Authors: Bandar Subhashini, D Praveen Kumar, E Lakshman

 DOI:  https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i10.83

Abstract

Leprosy is caused by M. leprae and predominantly affects the skin and peripheral nerves. The disease is endemic in many tropical and subtropical countries

Materials and Methods: 38 skin biopsies from patients clinically diagnosed as leprosy were taken for study. The biopsies were formalin fixed and slides were stained with Hematoxylin and Eosin stain

Results: The predominant type of leprosy was Borderline Tuberculoid leprosy(BT) seen in 20 cases (52.63%) followed by Borderline Lepromatous leprosy(BL) seen in 10 cases(26.32%). 4 cases (10.53%) of Lepromatous leprosy(LL) and 3 cases(7.89%) of Tuberculoid leprosy(TT) were seen. 1 case(2.63%) of Histoid leprosy was seen in the study.

Conclusion: Histopathological examination of skin biopsies in leprosy is important to know the type of leprosy which is important for the treatment of patients.

Keywords: Leprosy, Tuberculoid, Lepromatous, Histioid, Histopathological study

References

  1. Jopling WH, McDougall AC. The Disease. In: Handbook of Leprosy. 5th ed, Delhi: CBS Publishers and Distributors; 1996. p.10-53.
  2. Gupta R, Kar HK, Bharadwaj M. Revalidation of various clinical criteria for the classifi cation of leprosy – A clinic-pathological study. Lepr Rev 2012;83:354-62.
  3. Rad F, Ghaderi E, Moradi G, Salimzadeh H. The study of disability status of live leprosy patients in Kurdistan province of Iran. Pak J Med Sci 2007;23:857-61.
  4. Pathak DT, Jha AK. Clinico -histopathological correlation in leprosy: A tertiary care hospital based study. Our Dermatol Online 2013;4:294-6.
  5. Peters ES, Eshiet AL. Male-female (sex) differences in leprosy patients in south eastern Nigeria: Females present late for diagnosis and treatment and have higher rates of deformity. Lepr Rev 2002;73:262-7.
  6. Sehgal VN, Srivastava G, Singh N, Prasad PV. Histoid leprosy: the impact of the entity on the postglobal leprosy elimination era. Int J Dermatol. 2009;48:603–610.
  7. Park JE, Park K. Epidemiology of communicable diseases. In: Preventive and Social Medicine, 1991. p.215-25.
  8. Nandarni NS, Rege VL. Significance of histopathological classification in leprosy. Indian J Lepr 1999; 71 (3): 325-9.
  9. Shivamurthy V, Gurubasavaraj H, Sastry SP, Kumar P. Histomorphological study of leprosy. Afr J Med Health Sci 2013;12:68-73.
  10. Ridley D.S. & Jopling WH : (c) Classific-ation of leprosy according to Immunity. A five group system. International Journal of leprosy 34, 255-273, 1966.
  11. Neha Sharma, Dr.Neela M. Patel, Dr. Nirali Mahakal Lepra Reactions-A Clinical & Histopathological study International Journal of scientific Research, Vol.11, issue.1January 2013.
  12. Chacko CJG. Role of histopathology in the early diagnosis of leprosy. Indian J Lepr 1993; 65 (1): 23-7.
  13. Singh K, Jyengar B, Singh R. Variations in Clinical and Histopathological classific-ation of leprosy – a report and a plausible explanation. Lepr India 1983; 55 (3): 472-8.
  14. Lucus SB, Ridley DS. Use of histopathology in leprosy dignosis and research. Lep Rev 1989; 60: 257-62.
  15. Panday AN, Tailor HJ. Clinohistopath-ological Correlation of leprosy. Ind J Dermatol Venereol Lep 2008; 74 :74-76.

Corresponding Author

D Praveen Kumar

Resident, General Medicine, KMC Warangal.

Email- This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.