This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

M. John Gill, MB, MSC, FRCPC; John Arlette, MD, FRCPC; Kirk Barber, MD, FRCPC; K. A. Buchan, MB, ChB
Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases The University of Calgary 3330 Hospital Dr NW Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 4N1

Arch Dermatol. 1990;126(12):1649.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

The comments of Groves et al are pertinent and support our impression of the limited recognition of human orf infections. We feel that the diagnostic approach to this infection is best determined by the site and stage of the lesion, as well as the facilities and expertise available locally.

A history of exposure to an infected animal and a characteristic appearance may be adequate for a clinical diagnosis. If electron microscopy is available, aspiration of vesicular fluid before the scab forms appears painless and sensitive in our hands. Scab examination by electron microscopy can be appropriate in the later stages of infection. If there is no electron microscopy, but a skilled dermatopathologist is available, an invasive technique such as skin biopsy may be useful. It would exclude other diagnoses and, provided no superinfection is present, would be sensitive in confirming the diagnosis of orf.¹ . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?