scholarly journals The role of immunohistochemical staining with CK7 in the differential diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis

2019 ◽  
Vol 120 (11) ◽  
pp. 839-842
Author(s):  
M. Ozsen ◽  
S. B. Adim ◽  
E. U. Akyildiz ◽  
S. Gurel
2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (Suppl. 2) ◽  
pp. 53-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina G. Tiniakos ◽  
John G. Brain ◽  
Yvonne A. Bury

The diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is based on a combination of biochemical, immunological and histological features and exclusion of other causes of liver disease. Typical histological features include a chronic hepatitis pattern of injury with portal inflammation and interface activity, predominance of plasma cells in the portal infiltrate, emperipolesis, and hepatocellular rosette formation. Centrilobular injury with prominent hepatocellular necrosis and mononuclear inflammation is now recognised in the histological spectrum of AIH and may represent an early stage of the disease. Liver histology plays a major role in clinical diagnostic scoring systems and is important to confirm or support the clinical diagnosis of AIH. This review focuses on the role of histopathology in AIH and highlights the contribution of histological interpretation to the diagnosis of AIH, differential diagnosis from other entities, recognition of concurrent liver disease, and identification of the so-called overlap or variant syndromes, and addresses the importance of liver biopsy in the management and prognosis of patients with AIH.


2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Campanelli ◽  
Francesca Cabry ◽  
Roberto Marasca ◽  
Roberta Gelmini

GYNECOLOGY ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-72
Author(s):  
S.A. Martynov ◽  
◽  
L.V. Adamyan ◽  
E.A. Kulabukhova ◽  
P.V. Uchevatkina ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 452-463
Author(s):  
E. Cebada Chaparro ◽  
J. Lloret del Hoyo ◽  
R. Méndez Fernández

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Jan M. Wit ◽  
Sjoerd D. Joustra ◽  
Monique Losekoot ◽  
Hermine A. van Duyvenvoorde ◽  
Christiaan de Bruin

The current differential diagnosis for a short child with low insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) and a normal growth hormone (GH) peak in a GH stimulation test (GHST), after exclusion of acquired causes, includes the following disorders: (1) a decreased spontaneous GH secretion in contrast to a normal stimulated GH peak (“GH neurosecretory dysfunction,” GHND) and (2) genetic conditions with a normal GH sensitivity (e.g., pathogenic variants of <i>GH1</i> or <i>GHSR</i>) and (3) GH insensitivity (GHI). We present a critical appraisal of the concept of GHND and the role of 12- or 24-h GH profiles in the selection of children for GH treatment. The mean 24-h GH concentration in healthy children overlaps with that in those with GH deficiency, indicating that the previously proposed cutoff limit (3.0–3.2 μg/L) is too high. The main advantage of performing a GH profile is that it prevents about 20% of false-positive test results of the GHST, while it also detects a low spontaneous GH secretion in children who would be considered GH sufficient based on a stimulation test. However, due to a considerable burden for patients and the health budget, GH profiles are only used in few centres. Regarding genetic causes, there is good evidence of the existence of Kowarski syndrome (due to <i>GH1</i> variants) but less on the role of <i>GHSR</i> variants. Several genetic causes of (partial) GHI are known (<i>GHR</i>, <i>STAT5B</i>, <i>STAT3</i>, <i>IGF1</i>, <i>IGFALS</i> defects, and Noonan and 3M syndromes), some responding positively to GH therapy. In the final section, we speculate on hypothetical causes.


Pathology ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takuya Moriya ◽  
Yuji Kozuka ◽  
Naoki Kanomata ◽  
Gary M. Tse ◽  
Puay-Hoon Tan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document