A comparison of acquired port-Wine stain with congenital port-Wine stain using an image analyzer

Jung Ju Lee, Jae Chul Lee, Byung Soo Kim, Weon Ju Lee, Seok Jong Lee, Do Won Kim, Yun Hwan Jang, Han Ik Bae

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


Background: Recent reports have proposed that there were no differences between acquired port-Wine stain (APWS) and congenital port-Wine stain (CPWS) except the onset of disease. Pulsed dye laser (PDL) therapy is regarded as the treatment of choice in PWS. Although in some articles, APWS might have shown a better response to PDL than CPWS, this is still controversial. It has been assumed however, that there might be some differences determining therapeutic responses between the two entities. Objective: The purpose of this study is to find out some histopathologic differences between APWS and CPWS.Methods: 14 patients with APWS and 17 patients with CPWS from our patient files were included in this study. Immunohistochemical staining by factor VIII-related antigen was carried out on the specimens of punch biopsy to better visualize the blood vessels. Histopathologic assessment of variables such as vessel area, percentage of vascular area and vessel depth was performed using a computer-assisted image analyzer program. Results: The mean vessel area in APWS was 1014.7 ± 782.5μm2 and that of CPWS was 1341.5 ± 689.9μm2. The mean percentage of vascular area in APWS was 2.02 ± 1.38% and that of CPWS was 2.65 ± 1.56%. The mean vessel depth in APWS was 327.5 ± 120.7μm and 321.7 ± 93.1μm in CPWS. No histopathologic variable was statistically significant using the Mann- Whitney test (p>0.05).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-5
Number of pages5
JournalAnnals of Dermatology
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2008


  • Image analyzer
  • Port-Wine stain


Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of acquired port-Wine stain with congenital port-Wine stain using an image analyzer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this