User login
The correct answer is benign familial pemphigus (choice “b”). Also known as Hailey-Hailey disease, this is an unusual autosomally inherited blistering disease.
Benign familial pemphigus (BFP) is often mistaken for bacterial infection, such as pyoderma (choice “a”) or impetigo (choice “c”). Although it can become secondarily infected, its origins are entirely different.
Contact dermatitis (choice “d”) in its more severe forms can present in a similar manner. However, it would have shown entirely different changes (acute inflammation and spongiosis) on biopsy.
See next page for the discussion...
DISCUSSION
In 1939, two dermatologist-brothers in Georgia saw a patient with this previously unreported condition. They uncovered the family history and worked out the histologic basis, which they then described in the literature. They named the condition benign familial pemphigus, but it is now more commonly known as Hailey-Hailey disease in their honor.
Pemphigus vulgaris (PV), a serious blistering disease, was more common and far more feared at the time of the Hailey brothers’ discovery. Nearly 100% of PV patients died from the condition in that pre-steroid, pre-antibiotic era (most from secondary bacterial infection).
Fortunately, BFP is more benign, though it shares some features with PV. Both are said to be Nikolsky-positive, meaning the initial blisters can be extended with digital pressure. But BFP, unlike PV, does not involve deposition of immunoglobulins (IgA in the case of PV), nor is it accompanied by circulating auto-antibodies. BFP patients typically have no systemic symptoms, whereas in those with PV, the oral mucosae are often affected.
Herpes simplex virus, which was the primary care provider’s initial suspected diagnosis, can cause somewhat similar outbreaks, even in this area. However, it was effectively ruled out by the lack of response to treatment and by the biopsy results.
Although BFP is an inherited condition, it demonstrates variable penetrance, as in our case. It is rare enough that diagnosis is almost invariably delayed while other diagnoses are considered and treated. The actual “lesion” of BFP is still debated, but appears to involve the quality and quantity of desmosomes (microscopic structures that act as connecting fibers between layers of tissue) breaking down, often because of heat and friction, eventuating in blistering. This theory is bolstered by considerable research and by the fact that most cases present in intertriginous areas, such as the neck, axillae, and groin. Appearing episodically, it typically begins in the third to fourth decade of life, tending to diminish with age.
Biopsy is often necessary to confirm the diagnosis of BFP, with the sample best taken from perilesional skin to avoid separation of friable sample fragments. Additional specimens can be taken for special handling (Michel’s media) to detect immunoglobulins that might be seen in other blistering diseases.
See next page for treatment...
TREATMENT
BFP can be treated empirically with application of a soothing solution of aluminum acetate, or more specifically with topical corticosteroids (class III to IV) and topical antibiotics (eg, clindamycin 2% solution), plus/minus oral minocycline, which has potent anti-inflammatory as well as antimicrobial effects.
Difficult cases should be referred to dermatology, which has a number of treatments at its disposal. This includes diaminodiphenyl sulfone (dapsone), systemic glucocorticoids, methotrexate, systemic retinoids, and even local injection of botulinum toxin to decrease local hidrosis.
This patient is responding well to a regimen of oral minocycline 100 mg bid, topical clindamycin 2% bid application, and topical tacrolimus.
The correct answer is benign familial pemphigus (choice “b”). Also known as Hailey-Hailey disease, this is an unusual autosomally inherited blistering disease.
Benign familial pemphigus (BFP) is often mistaken for bacterial infection, such as pyoderma (choice “a”) or impetigo (choice “c”). Although it can become secondarily infected, its origins are entirely different.
Contact dermatitis (choice “d”) in its more severe forms can present in a similar manner. However, it would have shown entirely different changes (acute inflammation and spongiosis) on biopsy.
See next page for the discussion...
DISCUSSION
In 1939, two dermatologist-brothers in Georgia saw a patient with this previously unreported condition. They uncovered the family history and worked out the histologic basis, which they then described in the literature. They named the condition benign familial pemphigus, but it is now more commonly known as Hailey-Hailey disease in their honor.
Pemphigus vulgaris (PV), a serious blistering disease, was more common and far more feared at the time of the Hailey brothers’ discovery. Nearly 100% of PV patients died from the condition in that pre-steroid, pre-antibiotic era (most from secondary bacterial infection).
Fortunately, BFP is more benign, though it shares some features with PV. Both are said to be Nikolsky-positive, meaning the initial blisters can be extended with digital pressure. But BFP, unlike PV, does not involve deposition of immunoglobulins (IgA in the case of PV), nor is it accompanied by circulating auto-antibodies. BFP patients typically have no systemic symptoms, whereas in those with PV, the oral mucosae are often affected.
Herpes simplex virus, which was the primary care provider’s initial suspected diagnosis, can cause somewhat similar outbreaks, even in this area. However, it was effectively ruled out by the lack of response to treatment and by the biopsy results.
Although BFP is an inherited condition, it demonstrates variable penetrance, as in our case. It is rare enough that diagnosis is almost invariably delayed while other diagnoses are considered and treated. The actual “lesion” of BFP is still debated, but appears to involve the quality and quantity of desmosomes (microscopic structures that act as connecting fibers between layers of tissue) breaking down, often because of heat and friction, eventuating in blistering. This theory is bolstered by considerable research and by the fact that most cases present in intertriginous areas, such as the neck, axillae, and groin. Appearing episodically, it typically begins in the third to fourth decade of life, tending to diminish with age.
Biopsy is often necessary to confirm the diagnosis of BFP, with the sample best taken from perilesional skin to avoid separation of friable sample fragments. Additional specimens can be taken for special handling (Michel’s media) to detect immunoglobulins that might be seen in other blistering diseases.
See next page for treatment...
TREATMENT
BFP can be treated empirically with application of a soothing solution of aluminum acetate, or more specifically with topical corticosteroids (class III to IV) and topical antibiotics (eg, clindamycin 2% solution), plus/minus oral minocycline, which has potent anti-inflammatory as well as antimicrobial effects.
Difficult cases should be referred to dermatology, which has a number of treatments at its disposal. This includes diaminodiphenyl sulfone (dapsone), systemic glucocorticoids, methotrexate, systemic retinoids, and even local injection of botulinum toxin to decrease local hidrosis.
This patient is responding well to a regimen of oral minocycline 100 mg bid, topical clindamycin 2% bid application, and topical tacrolimus.
The correct answer is benign familial pemphigus (choice “b”). Also known as Hailey-Hailey disease, this is an unusual autosomally inherited blistering disease.
Benign familial pemphigus (BFP) is often mistaken for bacterial infection, such as pyoderma (choice “a”) or impetigo (choice “c”). Although it can become secondarily infected, its origins are entirely different.
Contact dermatitis (choice “d”) in its more severe forms can present in a similar manner. However, it would have shown entirely different changes (acute inflammation and spongiosis) on biopsy.
See next page for the discussion...
DISCUSSION
In 1939, two dermatologist-brothers in Georgia saw a patient with this previously unreported condition. They uncovered the family history and worked out the histologic basis, which they then described in the literature. They named the condition benign familial pemphigus, but it is now more commonly known as Hailey-Hailey disease in their honor.
Pemphigus vulgaris (PV), a serious blistering disease, was more common and far more feared at the time of the Hailey brothers’ discovery. Nearly 100% of PV patients died from the condition in that pre-steroid, pre-antibiotic era (most from secondary bacterial infection).
Fortunately, BFP is more benign, though it shares some features with PV. Both are said to be Nikolsky-positive, meaning the initial blisters can be extended with digital pressure. But BFP, unlike PV, does not involve deposition of immunoglobulins (IgA in the case of PV), nor is it accompanied by circulating auto-antibodies. BFP patients typically have no systemic symptoms, whereas in those with PV, the oral mucosae are often affected.
Herpes simplex virus, which was the primary care provider’s initial suspected diagnosis, can cause somewhat similar outbreaks, even in this area. However, it was effectively ruled out by the lack of response to treatment and by the biopsy results.
Although BFP is an inherited condition, it demonstrates variable penetrance, as in our case. It is rare enough that diagnosis is almost invariably delayed while other diagnoses are considered and treated. The actual “lesion” of BFP is still debated, but appears to involve the quality and quantity of desmosomes (microscopic structures that act as connecting fibers between layers of tissue) breaking down, often because of heat and friction, eventuating in blistering. This theory is bolstered by considerable research and by the fact that most cases present in intertriginous areas, such as the neck, axillae, and groin. Appearing episodically, it typically begins in the third to fourth decade of life, tending to diminish with age.
Biopsy is often necessary to confirm the diagnosis of BFP, with the sample best taken from perilesional skin to avoid separation of friable sample fragments. Additional specimens can be taken for special handling (Michel’s media) to detect immunoglobulins that might be seen in other blistering diseases.
See next page for treatment...
TREATMENT
BFP can be treated empirically with application of a soothing solution of aluminum acetate, or more specifically with topical corticosteroids (class III to IV) and topical antibiotics (eg, clindamycin 2% solution), plus/minus oral minocycline, which has potent anti-inflammatory as well as antimicrobial effects.
Difficult cases should be referred to dermatology, which has a number of treatments at its disposal. This includes diaminodiphenyl sulfone (dapsone), systemic glucocorticoids, methotrexate, systemic retinoids, and even local injection of botulinum toxin to decrease local hidrosis.
This patient is responding well to a regimen of oral minocycline 100 mg bid, topical clindamycin 2% bid application, and topical tacrolimus.
For three months, a 38-year-old man has been trying to resolve an “eruption” on his neck. The rash burns and itches, though only mildly, and produces clear fluid. His primary care provider initially prescribed acyclovir, then valacyclovir; neither helped. Subsequent courses of oral antibiotics (cephalexin 500 mg qid for three weeks, then ciprofloxacin 500 mg bid for two weeks) also had no beneficial effect. There is no family history of similar outbreaks. The patient, however, has had several of these eruptions—on the face as well as the neck—since his 20s. They typically last two to four weeks, then disappear completely for months or years. The eruptions tend to occur in the summer. He denies any history of cold sores and does not recall any premonitory symptoms prior to this eruption. He further denies any history of atopy or immunosuppression. His health is otherwise excellent, and he is taking no prescription medications. The denuded area measures about 8 x 4 cm, from his nuchal scalp down to the C6 area of the posterior neck. Discrete ruptured vesicles are seen on the periphery of the site. A layer of peeling skin, resembling wet toilet tissue, covers the partially denuded central portion, at the base of which is distinctly erythematous underlying raw tissue. There is no erythema surrounding the lesion, and no nodes are palpable in the area. A 4-mm punch biopsy is performed, with a sample taken from the periphery of the lesion and submitted for routine handling. It shows a hyperplastic epithelium, as well as intradermal and suprabasilar acantholysis extending focally into the spinous layer.
