This cross-sectional diagnostic study evaluates dermoscopic patterns in vitiligo, suggesting enhanced diagnostic precision through noninvasive techniques.
Background: Vitiligo is a common acquired depigmenting disorder with significant psychosocial impact, particularly in darker skin types. Clinical differentiation of vitiligo from other hypopigmented conditions can be challenging. Dermoscopy offers a noninvasive tool to visualize subsurface changes, which may correlate with histopathological features and help assess disease activity. Objective: To evaluate and correlate the dermoscopic patterns with histopathological findings in vitiligo patients, aiming to enhance diagnostic precision through noninvasive techniques. Methods: This cross-sectional diagnostic study was conducted over 3 months on 16 clinically diagnosed adult vitiligo patients aged 18–50 years. After informed consent, detailed history, clinical examination, Wood’s lamp assessment, and dermoscopic evaluation were performed using DermLite DL4. Punch biopsy (2–3 mm) was obtained from the same lesion site for histopathological examination using hematoxylin and eosin staining. Data were analyzed and correlations were assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Results: The most common dermoscopic findings were tapioca sago appearance (87.5%), trichrome pattern (75%), and repigmentation islets (68.75%). These corresponded histologically to focal melanocyte loss, perifollicular repigmentation, and clusters of active melanocytes, respectively. Reduced and absent networks also showed histological concordance with melanocyte depletion. All dermoscopic features showed a perfect positive correlation ( r = 1) with corresponding histopathological findings. Conclusion: Dermoscopy proves to be a highly reliable, noninvasive modality for evaluating vitiligo, with excellent correlation to histopathology. Incorporating dermoscopy into routine clinical practice may reduce the need for invasive biopsies and aid in disease monitoring.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Quazi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: