Diagnosis

Immunofluorescence Mapping for the Diagnosis of Epidermolysis Bullosa

Accurate diagnosis of epidermolysis bullosa (EB) has significant implications for prognosis, management, and genetic counseling.

To describe diagnostic testing patterns and assess diagnostic concordance of transmission electron microscopy (TEM), immunofluorescence mapping (IFM), and genetic analysis for EB.

A retrospective cohort included patients enrolled in the Epidermolysis Bullosa Clinical Characterization and Outcomes Database from January 1, 2004, to July 8, 2019. Tests concluding the same EB type (EB simplex, junctional EB, dominant dystrophic EB, and recessive dystrophic EB) were considered concordant; those concluding different EB types were considered discordant; and those with nonspecific/nondefinitive results were equivocal.

A total of 970 diagnostic tests were conducted from 1984 to 2018 in 771 patients. Genetic analyses were performed chronologically later than IFM or TEM (P < .001). The likelihood of undergoing genetic analysis was greater for junctional EB and recessive dystrophic EB, and the same for dominant dystrophic EB as compared with EB simplex. TEM results in 163 patients were equivocal (55%), concordant (42%), and discordant (3%). IFM results in 185 patients were equivocal (54%), concordant (42%), and discordant (4%).

Retrospective design.

Diagnostic testing has shifted in favor of genetic analysis. TEM and IFM frequently offer equivocal findings when compared to the specificity afforded by genetic analysis.

Inherited epidermolysis bullosa is a group of genetic blistering diseases with a broad spectrum of clinical severity and molecular defects. Epidermolysis bullosa results from mutations in genes encoding proteins involved in cell-cell and cell-matrix adhesion in the epidermis. Immunofluorescence antigen mapping makes use of monoclonal antibodies against proteins of the dermal-epidermal junction zone to determine the layer of skin where cleavage occurs and the relative protein abundance. It allows the diagnosis of the type and subtype of inherited epidermolysis bullosa and sheds light on molecular mechanisms underlying the disease. Immunofluorescence mapping steps include obtaining a skin biopsy sample, processing the biopsy material, antigen-antibody interaction on tissue, washing, incubation with fluorescently conjugated secondary antibodies, mounting, observation under a fluorescence microscope, and interpretation. A minimal antibody panel allows discrimination of the main epidermolysis bullosa subtypes. Extended panels can be used depending on the diagnostic or scientific question to be addressed. Immunofluorescence mapping contributed to significant progress in understanding epidermolysis bullosa, including identification of new underlying genetic mutations, mutation mechanisms, and the presence of revertant mosaicism. It is also an important tool in the assessment of the efficacy of experimental therapeutic approaches.

Genetic skin diseases, or genodermatoses, often have extracutaneous manifestations. Ocular manifestations in particular can have significant clinical implications, like blindness. Other manifestations, such as the corneal opacities that occur in X-linked ichthyosis, are asymptomatic but characteristic of a particular genodermatosis. Ophthalmologic examination can aid in diagnosis when characteristic findings are seen. The genodermatoses with ocular manifestations will be reviewed, but neurocutaneous, syndromes, genetic pigmentary disorders, and genetic metabolic diseases are not included because they are covered elsewhere in this issue.

Patients with the genetic blistering disease epidermolysis bullosa (EB) often have chronic wounds that can become colonized by different bacteria, especially the opportunistic pathogen Staphylococcus aureus. We therefore determined the S. aureus colonization rates in EB patients from the Netherlands by collecting swabs from their anterior nares, throats and wounds. Within a period of ∼2 years, more than 90% of the sampled chronic wounds of EB patients were found to be colonized by S. aureus. Molecular typing revealed that EB patients were not colonized by a single S. aureus type. Rather the S. aureus population structure in the sampled EB patients mirrored the local S. aureus population structure within the Netherlands. Furthermore, multiple types of S. aureus were found in close proximity to each other within individual chronic wounds, indicating that these S. aureus types are not mutually exclusive. Over time, strong fluctuations in the S. aureus types sampled from individual EB patients were observed. This high exposure to different S. aureus types is apparently reflected by high plasma levels of antistaphylococcal IgG's, especially in patients carrying multiple S. aureus types. It remains to be determined to what extent this strong immune response protects EB patients against serious staphylococcal infections. Lastly, further research is needed to define the impact of staphylococcal colonization of chronic wounds on the development, exacerbation and healing of such wounds in patients with EB.

Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is a group of inherited, mechanobullous disorders caused by mutations in various structural proteins in the skin. There have been several advances in the classification of EB since it was first introduced in the late 19th century. We now recognize four major types of EB, depending on the location of the target proteins and level of the blisters: EB simplex (epidermolytic), junctional EB (lucidolytic), dystrophic EB (dermolytic), and Kindler syndrome (mixed levels of blistering). This contribution will summarize the most recent classification and discuss the molecular basis, target genes, and proteins involved. We have also included new subtypes, such as autosomal dominant junctional EB and autosomal recessive EB due to mutations in the dystonin (DST) gene, which encodes the epithelial isoform of bullouspemphigoid antigen 1. The main laboratory diagnostic techniques—immunofluorescence mapping, transmission electron microscopy, and mutation analysis—will also be discussed. Finally, the clinical characteristics of the different major EB types and subtypes will be reviewed.