Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 16, 2026

Optimized Protocols for Mycobacterium leprae Strain Management: Frozen Stock Preservation and Maintenance in Athymic Nude Mice
Published on: March 23, 2014
Histopathological Diagnosis of Leprosy Type 1 Reaction with Emphasis on Interobserver Variation
Insights
Diagnosing leprosy reversal reactions (RR) is challenging due to disparities between clinicians and pathologists. This study identifies key histopathological clues like dermal edema to improve RR diagnosis.
Area of Science:
- Dermatology
- Pathology
- Infectious Diseases
Background:
- Leprosy reversal reaction (RR) is an acute inflammatory complication of leprosy.
- Discrepancies exist in diagnosing RR between clinicians and pathologists, compounded by inter-observer variability among pathologists.
- There is a lack of universally agreed-upon diagnostic criteria for RR in histopathology.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess clinicopathological correlation in diagnosing leprosy reversal reactions (RR).
- To evaluate inter-observer agreement among pathologists in identifying RR histopathologically.
- To identify reliable histopathological features for diagnosing RR.
Main Methods:
- 120 leprosy biopsies and H&E stained slides were reviewed by three independent pathologists.
- Pathologists were blinded to clinical diagnosis and each other's assessments.
- Histopathological findings were analyzed for correlation with clinical diagnosis and inter-observer agreement using Kappa statistics.
Main Results:
- Discordance between clinical and histopathological diagnoses ranged from 23.7% to 34.5%.
- Consistent histopathological findings across observers included dermal edema, intragranuloma edema, and epidermal erosion.
- Kappa statistics indicated good inter-observer agreement among the pathologists (κ = 0.61–0.83).
Conclusions:
- Leprosy reversal reactions (RR) may be underdiagnosed on histopathological examination.
- Dermal edema, edema within the granuloma, and partial obliteration of the grenz zone by granuloma are reliable histopathological indicators for diagnosing RR.
Abstract:
Upgrading typel lepra reaction or reversal reaction (RR) is an acute inflammatory complication of leprosy and a disparity exists between clinicians and pathologists for diagnosing a RR. Inter-observer variations among pathologists also compound this problem as no universally agreed diagnostic criteria exist. 120 biopsies and H&E stained slides were assessed by 3 pathologists. The pathologists were blinded to the clinical diagnosis and to each other's observations. Each pathologist assigned a likelihood of reaction by their histopathological observations as definitely reaction, probable reaction and no reaction. Clinicopathological correlation and interobserver agreement was analyzed statistically. Discordance between clinical and histopathological diagnosis was seen in 30.8% by pathologist 1 (P1), 23.7% by pathologist 2 (P2) and 34.5% bythe pathologist 3 (P3). Dermal edema, intragranuloma edema and epidermal erosion were consistent findings by all observers. Definite reaction was seen in 54.2% of cases by P1, 53.3% by P2 and 34.5% by P3. Kappa statistics for strength of agreement showed good agreement between 3 pathologists with P1 (κ = 0.83), P2 (κ = 0.61), P3 (κ = 0.62). RR are underdiagnosed on histopathological examination but this study shows that dermal edema, edema within the granuloma and partial obliteration of grenz zone by granuloma are reliable clues to diagnose a RR on histopathology.
Related Concept Videos
Pulmonary Tuberculosis III
The first classification is based on the development of the disease, and it includes the following categories:
Hypersensitivity Reactions: Delayed Hypersensitivity Reactions
Hypersensitivity Reactions: Immune-Complex Reactions
Pulmonary Tuberculosis IV
Several diagnostic approaches are used to detect TB. The conventional method is the Tuberculin Skin Test (TST), also known as the Mantoux test. However, this method has...
Hypersensitivity Reactions: Cytolytic Reactions
Drug Toxicity: Allergic Reactions

