Robabeh Abedini1, Kambiz Kamyab Hesari2, Maryam Daneshpazhooh1, Mahshid Sadat Ansari3, Hamid Reza Tohidinik4,5, Mahsa Ansari6. 1. Department of Dermatology, Autoimmune Bullous Diseases Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 2. Department of Dermatopathology, Razi Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 3. Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 4. School of Public Health, Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran. 5. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 6. Department of Dermatology, Autoimmune Bullous Diseases Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ansarima66@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the validity of dermatoscopy in primary cicatricial alopecias (PCAs) and its subtypes, including lichen planopilaris and discoid lupus erythematosus. Trichoscopic features of PCAs, their prevalence, and validity were evaluated in this study. METHODS: One hundred patients with PCA underwent dermatoscopy. Biopsy specimens were obtained after the site was marked with a dermatoscope. The control group comprised 100 patients with non-cicatricial alopecia and 100 normal individuals. Finally, the prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity of trichoscopic features were evaluated using SPSS and Stata software. RESULTS: The absence of follicular opening, perifollicular scale, and presence of one scarring pattern or white patch were sensitive and specific patterns in the trichoscopy of PCAs. The presence of tortuous branching vessels and follicular keratotic plugging was 100% specific for a diagnosis of discoid lupus erythematosus. CONCLUSIONS: Some trichoscopic features can help a dermatologist to differentiate between non-cicatricial alopecia and PCA. Moreover, a group of dermatoscopic features can be helpful in the diagnosis of PCA subtypes.
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the validity of dermatoscopy in primary cicatricial alopecias (PCAs) and its subtypes, including lichen planopilaris and discoid lupus erythematosus. Trichoscopic features of PCAs, their prevalence, and validity were evaluated in this study. METHODS: One hundred patients with PCA underwent dermatoscopy. Biopsy specimens were obtained after the site was marked with a dermatoscope. The control group comprised 100 patients with non-cicatricial alopecia and 100 normal individuals. Finally, the prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity of trichoscopic features were evaluated using SPSS and Stata software. RESULTS: The absence of follicular opening, perifollicular scale, and presence of one scarring pattern or white patch were sensitive and specific patterns in the trichoscopy of PCAs. The presence of tortuous branching vessels and follicular keratotic plugging was 100% specific for a diagnosis of discoid lupus erythematosus. CONCLUSIONS: Some trichoscopic features can help a dermatologist to differentiate between non-cicatricial alopecia and PCA. Moreover, a group of dermatoscopic features can be helpful in the diagnosis of PCA subtypes.