Ayşe Serap KARADAĞ, Müzeyyen ASTARCI, Gülfer AKBAY, Mehtap AYDIN, Meral EKŞİOĞLU

Comparison of clinical and histopathologic findings of pathergy test with disposable/sharp and nondisposable/blunt needles in Behçet’s disease

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı künt uçlu iğnelerle yapılan uygulamanın sivri uçlu iğnelerle yapılana ve histopatolojik değerlendirmenin klinik değerlendirmeye bir üstünlük sağlayıp sağlamadığını değerlendirmektir. Yöntem ve Gereç: Çalışmaya 60 Behçet hastası ve 20 kontrol grubu hastası alındı. Paterji testi tüm hastalara künt ve sivri uçlu iğnelerle intradermal olarak uygulandı ve test sonuçları histopatolojik olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Aktif dönemdeki 40 Behçet hastasından künt uçlu iğne uygulanan hastaların 34’ünde (% 85) ve sivri uçlu iğne uygulanan hastaların 13’ünde (% 32.5) pozitiflik saptandı (p=0.0001). Aktif dönemde histopatolojik bulgular arasında da belirgin farklılıklar vardı (P < 0.05). Remisyon dönemindeki grupta (20 hasta) künt uçlu iğne uygulanan 9 (% 45) ve sivri uçlu iğne uygulanan 2 (% 10) hastada pozitif sonuç alındı (P = 0.013). Remisyon grubunda histopatolojik bulgulardaki farklılıklar istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi. Kontrol grubunda hem künt, hem de sivri uçlu iğnelerle yapılan paterji testi sonuçları negatifti. Sonuç: Bu çalışmada künt uçlu iğnelerin kullanılmasıyla sivri uçlu iğnelere göre daha yüksek oranda pozitiflik elde edildiği görülmüştür. Künt uçlu iğnelerle uygulanan paterji testinin klinik olarak değerlendirilmesinin Behçet hastalığı aktivitesini değerlendirmede yeterli olduğunu ve histopatolojik değerlendirmenin ekstra bir avantaj sağlamadığını düşünmekteyiz.

Behçet hastalarında künt ve sivri uçlu iğnelerle yapılan paterji testinin klinik ve histopatolojik bulgularının karşılaştırılması

Aim: The aim of this study was to determine whether using blunt instead of sharp needles presented any advantage and whether the histopathological interpretation prevailed over the clinical interpretation. Materials and Methods: This study was performed on 60 Behçet’s disease (BD) patients and 20 control subjects. The pathergy test was applied to all subjects intradermally with sharp and blunt needles and the histopathology of each test result was studied. Results: In the active period of BD (40 patients), positive test results were obtained in 34 (85.0%) patients using blunt needles and in 13 (32.5%) using sharp needles (P = 0.0001). In the active group, there was a significant difference in results when compared with the histopathologic findings (P < 0.05). In the remission period group (20 patients), positive results were obtained in 9 (45.0%) patients with blunt needles and in 2 (10.0%) with sharp needles (P = 0.013). In the remission group, there were no significant differences in results when compared with the histopathologic findings. In the control group patients, all blunt and sharp needle pathergy tests were negative. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated that a higher positivity rate is obtained in pathergy tests using blunt needles when compared with sharp needles. We suggest that clinical interpretation of the pathergy test with blunt needles is adequate to determine activity of BD; histopathologic interpretation does not provide any extra advantages.

PDF

___

1. Tüzün Y, Yurdakul S, Cem Mat M, Ozyazgan Y, Hamuryudan V, Tüzün B et al. Epidemiology of Behcet’s syndrome in Turkey. Int J Dermatol 1996; 35: 618-20.
2. O’Duffy JD. Behcet’s syndrome. N Engl J Med 1990; 332: 326- 8.
3. International Study Group for Behcet’s disease. Criteria for diagnosis of Behcet’s disease. Lancet 1990; 335: 1078-80.
4. Dilsen N, Konice M, Aral O, Ocal L, Inanç M, Gül A. Comparative study of the skin pathergy test with nondisposable/blunt and disposable/sharp needles in Behcet’s disease: confirmed specificity but decreased sensitivity with disposable/sharp needles. Ann Rheum Dis 1993; 52: 823-5.
5. Akmaz O, Erel A, Gurer MA. Comparison of histopathologic and clinical evaluations of pathergy test in Behcet’s disease. Int J Dermatol 2000; 39: 121-5.
6. Jorizzo JL, Solomon AR, Cavallo T. Behcet’s syndrome: immunopathologic and histopathologic assessment of pathergy lesions in diagnosis and follow-up. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1985; 109: 747-51.
7. Gilhar A, Winterstein G, Turani H, Landau J, Etzioni A. Skin hyperreactivity response (pathergy) in Behçet’s disease. J Am Acad Dermatol 1989; 21: 547-52.
8. Ozarmagan G, Saylan T, Azizlerli G, Ovül C, Aksungur VL. Reevaluation of the pathergy test in Behçet’s disease. Acta Derm Venereol 1991; 71: 75-6.
9. Friedman-Birnbaum R, Bergman R, Aizen E. Sensitivity and specificity of pathergy test results in Israeli patients with Behçet’s disease. Cutis 1990; 45: 261-4.
10. Haim S. The pathogenesis of lesions in Behcet’s disease. Dermatologica 1979; 158: 31-7.
11. Jorizzo JL, Abernethy JL, White WL, Mangelsdorf HC, Zouboulis CC, Sarica R et al. Mucocutaneous criteria for the diagnosis of Behcet’s disease: an analysis of clinicopathologic data from multiple international centers. J Am Acad Dermatol 1995; 32: 968-76.
12. Jorizzo JL, Solomon AR, Zanolli MD, Leshin B. Neutrophilic vascular reactions. J Am Acad Dermatol 1988; 19: 983-1005.
13. Ergun T, Gurbuz O, Harvell J. The histopathology of pathergy: a chronologic study of skin hyperreactivity in Behcet’s disease. Int J Dermatol 1998; 37: 929-33.
14. Chun SI, Daniel Su WP, Lee S. Histopathologic study of cutaneous lesions in Behcet’s syndrome. J Dermatol 1990; 17: 333-41.
15. Ergun T, Gurbuz O, Dogusoy G. Histopathologic features of the spontaneous pustular lesions of Behcet’s syndrome. Int J Dermatol 1998; 37: 194-6.