If you have a chronic rash and you think that it may be a result of SLE, and the rash has not yet been biospised by a dermatologist, it should be. The only way to diagonsis a rash is it to have it tested. There are four different types of LE rashes. 50 % of LE rashes are discoid lupus. All the LE rashes are a subtype of cutaneous lupus however not every person with a LE rash has SLE. If my rashes would have been biopsied 25 years ago, I would have had a diagonsis of TLE then, which would have saved me a lot of pain and suffering caused by sun exposure. I had to forced my dermatologist to biospies my rash, which was originally classsified as: bug bites, sun posioning, and allergic reactions. With this said, I feel it is extremely important to have any rash biospised to determine a diagonsis.
Chronic rashes are mainly to do with DLE which i have they are cutaneous which you've mentioned...SLE is mainly to do with the organs/RA and Joints.
You don't always need Biopsy's those are mainly done when the Dermo is'nt sure, when i saw my Dermo he did 9 bloods on me and it's according to what bloods are asked for and the bloods showed psoraisis/eczema/ high ANA/ENA and also SLE, so then i was refered to to Rheumo to deal with the SLE but as more rashes came it turne into DLE as steriod creams was'nt helping.
The only trouble with alot of the rashes we suffer are mimicing other complaints but like yourself if furthur bloods had been done when i was 18 i might have stood a better chance instead of what i've come to now.
How you've had to force him though is bad when he could have had percific bloods done...mine asked for 2 tests amongst the 9 bloods which the lab women had'nt done before and they had to phone and check on them.
I agree!!! I had a rash for over a month and my old Dr just said it was this or that and never did anything... well I endet up with 1inch in diameter big holes in my legs and feet. Later it had gotten so bad I needed to be hospitalized and come to find out I have developed Vasculitis. if my old Dr would have had the sence to do some tests my holes could have been provented. so now (4month later) I still have 2 of the holes that have yet to heal all the way... Like you said alot of pain and suffering could have been prevented by simply doing one test.
I too have had a rash off and on for over a year now..I finally went to a dermatologist who did 2 biopsies (one on each arm) and they both came back with Tumid Lupus.
If you've got a good Dermo and really knows what they're on about, they'll also know what blood tests can also show up what it might be.
sunshinespraypaint, it sounds like you was very lucky and it was found when it was...i really do hope the other's heal well for you, as vasculitis alone is alot...i've been tested for that and came in negative as i have large blisters form on the top of my feet which weep bad and then i have to apply steriod plasters, as my dermo said they can turn ulcerated.
I agree, my rash was biopsied at the Mayo because no one in Louisiana could figure it out. Now I know and have transferred all the results to my local medical doc and dermo. I have a question for the group........what doctor do I stick with, switch to and stay with? I have a Family Medical doctor that I see with all my zillions of issues but I go to my dermo to get rash cream and keep updated on my Rash and now that I've officially got Arthritis (intro systemic lupus possibly) in my neck I am wondering if I add a Rhemy to the mix. AHHH. Advice, experience, suggestions?
Years of experience i've had from ailments all linked to lupus and never new till 5yrs ago plus born with it.
I've got an excellent GP who's on the ball with me, a great Dermo who knows about skin besides SLE and a crap rheumo who loved doing the final diagnosis after my dermo but would'nt step no furthur than treating me with plaquenil or prednisone because of my history besides my organs.
Well my dermo as stepped in i'm off the plaquenil he's tested my DNA and it matched to Dapsone i've only been on it over a month but it treats DLE/SLE and RA.
I cannot fault the doctor one bit and my experience with just the one rheumo is they like the field of RA and not stepping furthur into Lupus but that's my opinion....everyone on the site is treated differentley by their specialists.
I had my rash off and on for about 7 years before my first biopsy. I have been treated for sub-cutaneous lupus for about 2 years now. I have been prescribed placquinil, cellcept and currently imuran with the rash still unresponsive to any of these meds. Today I saw my rheumatologist and she is sending me for a second biopsy because she said the first one (two yrs. ago) stated suspected sub-cutaneous lupus. I am wondering why in the world it has taken her 2 yrs of treating me (unsuccessfully) to want to now order another biopsy. Anyway, I will be glad to get some definite answers hopefully. I just needed to vent because these meds have pretty severe effects on the body and none are helping. Thanks for listening :)
I know I am late in responding to you however I hope this will help!
I had three skin biopsies done, the first one in May of 2007 that said consistent with Lupus Erythematosus however the direct immuonflorescent study was negative! Some three years later in August of 2010 I had a second skin biopsy done which stated consistent with tumid lupus and the direct immuonflorescent was positive. The 2007 test was done by a lab in New York call Beutner and the second one was done by a lab in Pompano Beach, Florida called Institute for immunofluorescence, by Dr. Carlos H. Nousari, who is a World Renowned Specialists for Cutaneous skin lupus. In June of 2010 I have a third biopsy done again by Dr. Nousari which came back positive for tumid lupus. I then had the New York lab send the 2007 biopsy to Dr. Nousari to redo the tests and believe it or not it too was positive to tumid lupus.
So in my opinion, yes you should have the biopsy done again, however make sure they do a direct immunofluoresent study on it.
Let me know how is all comes out. I hope my story helps you in your Decision!
Deenie
smile70 said:
I had my rash off and on for about 7 years before my first biopsy. I have been treated for sub-cutaneous lupus for about 2 years now. I have been prescribed placquinil, cellcept and currently imuran with the rash still unresponsive to any of these meds. Today I saw my rheumatologist and she is sending me for a second biopsy because she said the first one (two yrs. ago) stated suspected sub-cutaneous lupus. I am wondering why in the world it has taken her 2 yrs of treating me (unsuccessfully) to want to now order another biopsy. Anyway, I will be glad to get some definite answers hopefully. I just needed to vent because these meds have pretty severe effects on the body and none are helping. Thanks for listening
