All clinical phenotypes of morphea are characterized by inflammation and sclerosis of the skin, subcutaneous tissues, and muscles that can lead to fibrosis and, in some cases, affect the underlying bone and the central nervous system.1,2 Linear morphea can present as several different variants. The head variant (eg, En coup de sabre) involves linear induration on the dermis of the face, scalp, and underlying muscle, bone, and nerves. More commonly, linear morphea presents with lesions of the trunk and limb variant, with linear induration of the dermis, subcutaneous tissue, and sometimes underlying muscle and bone.2,5 According to a recent study, patients with linear morphea were also 64% more likely to have a deeper involvement of symptoms and increased risk of disease activity and damage at the subcutaneous level than the other subtypes. Additionally, the lesions associated with linear morphea were more commonly found on the trunk and extremities (74.6%) than those associated with the head variant (37.5%).5
Morphea can cause cosmetic scarring of tissue, hair loss, sclerosis, and atrophy of the epidermis, dermis, and subcutaneous tissue if left untreated. There can even be functional impairment of the limbs and joints, interfering with bone growth.1,5,6 Studies of pediatric patients with morphea have shown the disease can moderately impact patient quality of life, frequently causing pain and pruritus.1
As the patient case above demonstrates, linear morphea lesions usually present with an initial phase of inflammation and erythema that harden the skin and range in color from red to purple, followed by a non-active phase in which lesions turn yellowish-white, thicken, and atrophy over time. These processes can sometimes cause darker areas of hyperpigmentation and hair loss due to an abundance of collagen.1,2,6 Because the patient presented with scleroderma symptoms, linear morphea was suspected after an initial examination due to the location and shape of the lesions. Still, the guidelines recommend ruling out systemic sclerosis before making a linear morphea diagnosis. The early age of disease onset and the lack of nail fold capillary changes, swelling of hands, sclerodactyly of fingers, and presence of Raynaud’s phenomenon are key indicators to rule out systemic sclerosis.2,6 Moreover, morphea is histologically challenging to diagnose because it is so similar to systemic sclerosis.2
For all patients with suspected morphea, a thorough physical examination and in-depth history should be conducted. Any signs and symptoms involving subcutaneous tissues and the musculoskeletal system warrant further examination by a rheumatologist and/or orthopedic specialist.1 Delay in diagnosing morphea is usually due to physicians’ lack of expertise with the disease and its similarity to systemic sclerosis.1 Recent research into understanding the longitudinal impacts of morphea has revealed that existing dermatology-based quality-of-life assessments do not fully capture the functional limitations caused by the frequent deep soft tissue involvement of linear morphea.5 Joint deformities (8% vs 0.4%) and a limited range of motion (26% vs 20%) are also more likely to occur in patients with linear morphea than those with generalized morphea.3 Localized scleroderma and lesions tend to resolve slowly, if at all, and the disease waxes and wanes. Some pediatric patients with localized morphea have an increased risk of developing systemic morphea in the future.6,7 Therefore, it is recommended to treat the active disease and inflammation and monitor the cosmetic and functional sequelae to help prevent new lesions and improve long-term patient outcomes.1,5
References:
1. Florez-Pollack S, Kunzler E, Jacobe HT. Morphea: current concepts. Clin Dermatol. 2018;36(4):475-486. doi:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2018.04.005
2. Fett N, Werth VP. Update on morphea: part I. Epidemiology, clinical presentation, and pathogenesis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;64(2):217-230. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2010.05.045
3. Prasad S, Zhu JL, Schollaert-Fitch K, Torok KS, Jacobe HT. An evaluation of the performance of current morphea subtype classifications. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(4):1-8. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.5809
4. Leitenberger JJ, Cayce RL, Haley RW, Adams-Huet B, Bergstresser PR, Jacobe HT. Distinct autoimmune syndromes in morphea: a review of 245 adult and pediatric cases. Arch Dermatol. 2009;145(5):545-550. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2009.79
5. Kunzler E, Florez-Pollack S, Teske N, O’Brien J, Prasad S, Jacobe H. Linear morphea: clinical characteristics, disease course, and treatment of the morphea in adults and children cohort. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80(6):1664-1670.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.01.050
6. Fett NM. Morphea (localized scleroderma). JAMA Dermatol. 2013;149(9):1124. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.5079
7. Giuggioli D, Colaci M, Cocchiara E, Spinella A, Lumetti F, Ferri C. From localized scleroderma to systemic sclerosis: coexistence or possible evolution [published correction appears in Dermatol Res Pract. 2018 Jun 5;2018:6984282]. Dermatol Res Pract. 2018;2018:1284687. doi:10.1155/2018/1284687
Image is licensed under the Attribution-Share-Alike 4.0 International
Source: L.z.motloung55, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons