Biopsy

[jswog]

I had a biopsy for DH done earlier in the week, but the doctor took the biopsy from about 6" from the 'suspicious' area. Is this too far away to get results?

[pricklypear1971]

I have no idea but at least it wasn't on top of it.

I think it depends on your rash - DH can vary greatly in appearance.

Crossing my fingers you get the results you're looking for!

[mushroom]

Everything I have read has always said "immediately adjacent" to a lesion, but not on the lesion. Six inches sounds a bit of a stretch to "immediately adjacent"

[pricklypear1971]

I agree; however, if the rash "fades" rather than appears as 1 giant lesion there's a chance 6 inches is the first clear skin.

If you looked at my rash under a magnifier I had tiny bumps around the main lesion. That's one reason we were waiting to biopsy - because the whole area had "blown up" and the lesions supposedly destroy the iga - which is what they look for.

Hopefully, it comes back with the result Jswog wants.

[jswog]

Thank you for the responses! I have my fingers crossed that it is not too far away. Since the GI who did my endoscopy decided that he didn't need to do biopsies of the small intestine because he didn't 'see' any damage, I'm praying that this will serve as a definative diagnosis and, therefore, I will not be required to 'challenge' gluten in my diet and deal with the consequences...

[jswog]

Well, I got my results back this morning and, of course, they came back negative. So now I'm left to wonder if it really is negative or if the doctor is just an idiot who didn't do the biopsy correctly... This whold diagnostic journey is very frusterating and depressing...

[mushroom]

Oh, I am so sorry and I can understand how frustrated you must feel. Was the doctor a dermatologist? Is there someone else you can go to whom you can give instructions to as to how to do it properly?