BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to explore the role of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) fo the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA as a diagnostic aid in cutaneous tuberculosis using routinely processed skin biopsy specimens. METHODS AND RESULTS: A wide range of clinical specimens representing different forms of cutaneous tuberculosis and so-called tuberculids were studied. A sensitive and specific PCR assay targeting the sequence IS6110 of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex was used. The specimens were categorized as follows. 1 Acid-fast bacilli (AFB) positive on biopsy (nine specimens from seven patients who were immunocompromised). PCR was positive in five specimens. Of these, one specimen was culture positive and three specimens were culture negative. 2 AFB negative on biopsy: (a) tuberculosis verrucosa cutis (23 specimens); (b) lupus vulgaris (three specimens); (c) cutaneous tuberculosis clinically suspected (six specimens). PCR was negative in all specimens. 3 Tuberculids.' (a) erythema induratum/nodular vasculitis (20 specimens); (b) papulonecrotic tuberculid (two specimens); (c) erythema nodosum (20 specimens). PCR was negative in all specimens. CONCLUSIONS: The role of PCR in clinical dermatologic practice, at this stage, may be in differentiating between cutaneous tuberculosis and atypical mycobacterial infections in the context of an immunocompromised patient where AFB can be demonstrated on biopsy and cultures may be negative. In this clinical situation, PCR allows the prompt diagnosis and early institution of appropriate therapy. We have not found PCR to be a useful complement to the clinical and histologic diagnosis of "paucibacillary" forms of cutaneous tuberculosis.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to explore the role of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) fo the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA as a diagnostic aid in cutaneous tuberculosis using routinely processed skin biopsy specimens. METHODS AND RESULTS: A wide range of clinical specimens representing different forms of cutaneous tuberculosis and so-called tuberculids were studied. A sensitive and specific PCR assay targeting the sequence IS6110 of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex was used. The specimens were categorized as follows. 1 Acid-fast bacilli (AFB) positive on biopsy (nine specimens from seven patients who were immunocompromised). PCR was positive in five specimens. Of these, one specimen was culture positive and three specimens were culture negative. 2 AFB negative on biopsy: (a) tuberculosis verrucosa cutis (23 specimens); (b) lupus vulgaris (three specimens); (c) cutaneous tuberculosis clinically suspected (six specimens). PCR was negative in all specimens. 3 Tuberculids.' (a) erythema induratum/nodular vasculitis (20 specimens); (b) papulonecrotic tuberculid (two specimens); (c) erythema nodosum (20 specimens). PCR was negative in all specimens. CONCLUSIONS: The role of PCR in clinical dermatologic practice, at this stage, may be in differentiating between cutaneous tuberculosis and atypical mycobacterial infections in the context of an immunocompromised patient where AFB can be demonstrated on biopsy and cultures may be negative. In this clinical situation, PCR allows the prompt diagnosis and early institution of appropriate therapy. We have not found PCR to be a useful complement to the clinical and histologic diagnosis of "paucibacillary" forms of cutaneous tuberculosis.
Authors: Elisabeth Fabian; Bruno Schneeweiss; Thomas Valentin; Holger Flick; Ariane Aigelsreiter; Rainer Hofmann-Wellenhof; Lorenzo Cerroni; Anna Maria Goritschan; Hans-Peter Brezinsek; Sabine Zitta; Alexander Rosenkranz; Winfried Graninger; Guenter J Krejs Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 1.704