Clinicopathologic Diagnosis of Differentiated Vulvar Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Vulvar Aberrant Maturation.

Clicks: 299
ID: 263719
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #1 of 2 articles by views in Journal of lower genital tract disease

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The aim of the study was to describe the demographic, clinical, and histopathologic features of differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (dVIN) and vulvar aberrant maturation (VAM).Specimens from 2010 to 2020 reported as dVIN or VAM were reviewed. Clinical data included age, rurality, symptoms, and evidence of lichen sclerosus (LS). Histopathologic data included epithelial thickness, keratinization, architectural and dyskeratotic features, stroma, p16, and p53. Differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia and VAM were distinguished by assessment of basal nuclear chromatin, enlargement, pleomorphism, and mitoses.One hundred twenty women with a median age of 71 years had 179 examples of dVIN and VAM. Squamous cell carcinoma was concurrent in 66% and associated with rurality. Ten percent were asymptomatic, and all but 3 had evidence of LS. Differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia showed a range of thickness, architecture, and dyskeratosis; its unifying !feature was basal atypia. Differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia displayed hyperchromasia in 83% and easily observed mitoses in 70%. Nonkeratinizing morphology, subcategorized into basaloid and intermediate, occurred in 24% of women with dVIN. Traditional dVIN represented 62% of keratinizing cases; the remainder were atrophic (13%), hypertrophic (13%), acantholytic (8%), or subtle (5%). Vulvar aberrant maturation had abnormal stratum corneum, acanthosis, premature maturation, and enlarged vesicular nuclei. Null p53 helped distinguish dVIN from VAM and dermatoses.The morphology of dVIN encompasses nonkeratinizing and keratinizing types, the latter subdivided into traditional, acantholytic, atrophic, hypertrophic, and subtle. Diagnosis relies on basal atypia with supportive p16 and p53. Atypia exists on a biologic spectrum with mild abnormalities of VAM and reactive change. Identification of dVIN and VAM requires collaboration between clinicians and pathologists experienced in vulvar disorders.
Reference Key
day2020clinicopathologicjournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Day, Tania;Marzol, Alexandra;Pagano, Ross;Jaaback, Ken;Scurry, James;
Journal Journal of lower genital tract disease
Year 2020
DOI
10.1097/LGT.0000000000000569
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.