[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.158.119.60. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Practice Gaps
June 20, 2011

Recognizing and Managing Reticular Erythematous MucinosisComment on “Clinical Features and Efficacy of Antimalarial Treatment for Reticular Erythematous Mucinosis”

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Dermatology, Penn State Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania.

Arch Dermatol. 2011;147(6):715. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2011.142

The study by Kreuter et al1 identifies several practice and knowledge gaps regarding the diagnosis and management of reticular erythematous mucinosis (REM). The authors diagnosed REM in only 14 patients over 5 years in their referral dermatology center, and all of these patients had been referred by primary dermatologists for alternative diagnoses. Because of its rarity, many dermatologists may not recognize the characteristic features of REM. The authors discuss the substantial clinical and histologic similarities between REM and lupus erythematosus tumidus, thereby identifying another gap in our understanding of the relationship between these 2 entities and calling into question whether they are in fact distinct entities. The authors highlight the clinical similarities by using the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index to assess REM activity and response to treatment.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×