Diagnostic utility of direct immunofluorescence test panels for cutaneous vasculitis: A scoping review

Abstract

BackgroundDue to the immune‐mediated nature of non‐infectious cutaneous vasculitis, skin biopsy specimens are often submitted for direct immunofluorescence (DIF) testing when vasculitis is considered clinically. However, evidence regarding the clinical value of DIF has not been rigorously appraised.ObjectiveIn this scoping review, we aimed to systematically evaluate the peer‐reviewed literature on the utility of DIF in vasculitis to assist with the development of appropriate use criteria by the American Society of Dermatopathology.MethodsTwo electronic databases were searched for articles on DIF and vasculitis (January 1975–October 2023). Relevant case series involving more than or equal to three patients, published in English, and with full‐text availability were included. Additional articles were identified manually via reference review. Due to study heterogeneity, findings were analyzed descriptively.ResultsOf 255 articles identified, 61 met the inclusion criteria. Cumulatively representing over 1000 DIF specimens, several studies estimated DIF sensitivity to be 75%. While vascular immunoglobulin A (IgA) deposits on DIF were associated with renal disease, other systemic associations were inconsistent. Vascular IgG deposition may be overrepresented in ANCA‐associated vasculitis. Granular vascular and epidermal basement membrane zone Ig deposition differentiated hypocomplementemic from normocomplementemic urticarial vasculitis. Few studies have assessed the added value of DIF over routine microscopy alone in vasculitis.ConclusionsThis scoping review discovered that DIF testing for vasculitis has been performed not only for diagnostic confirmation of vasculitis but also for disease subtype classification and prediction of systemic associations. Future studies on test sensitivity of DIF compared to that of histopathology are needed.