Talk:Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus

Combine with Lichen sclerosus?[edit]

This article seems to overlap entitirely with Lichen sclerosus. Should they be combined? Renaissance Healer

These two entries should definitely be combined, but under the header "Lichen Sclerosus", not "Lichen Sclerosus et Atrophicus". LSA is an outdated term for this condition. Lichen Sclerosus has been known for at least ten years not to be a disease of atrophy, but of overactivity of the epidermis, which does sometimes lead to melding of the skin along fold lines and lines where the skin has broken apart. I can do the merge, if this agreed upon. I have a great deal of background in this area. --Vawter 21:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Vawter[reply]

Lichen Sclerosis (or Sclerosus) et atrophicus (LSA) is the term usually used when the disease occurs in men. Plain Lichen Sclerosis when it occurs in women or when refering to the disease in general. The diease has been called many thing over the years (White Spot, Csillag's disease, and Balanitis Xerotica Obliterans (BXO) in men, but now more commonly either LSA and LS respectively.

As for et Atrophicus, it should remain in the discription for men. In 1928 Stühmer^[1] described an atrophic, shrinking process involving the glans and prepuce and frequently leading to urethral stenosis. This does indeed happen in men. While it is the same disease, the differences in male and female structures results in great deal of difference in the way the disease progresses. -Wanderer X 13:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

^ Stühmer, A.: Balanitis xerotica obliterans (post-operationem) und ihre Beziehungen zur “Kraurosis glandis et praeputii penis,” Arch f. Dermat. u. Syph. 156:613, 1928.

Sclerorus?[edit]

Why is this spelt Lichen Sclerosus when sclerosis ends with -is? Is the -us suffix unique to this condition? If yes, this would be a good thing to explain in an etymology section.--Jcvamp 22:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No clue why the "sus" (and I've looked). It's unique to this particular disease. Perhaps an historical error? --Vawter 22:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could be. I checked out dictionary.com, which says the word 'sclerosis' came into Engish from middle Latin, from Greek. The -is suffix wasn't even Latinised to -us. It's a bit of a strange one.--Jcvamp 02:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How is a decision taken to merge articles? (I'm a newbie to Wikipedia, although not to science, writing (or LS, alas.)) I'm willing and able to do the merge (and expand the article, as well). Pls. let me know how to proceed. --Vawter 20:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's something that requires several people to petition for it. Larger changes generally have to be agreed on.

You could add a comment at Talk:Lichen_sclerosus, where someone has already suggested this, and add your views and ideas.--Jcvamp 02:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "sus" and "sis" suffix are the result of the spelling differences US and UK "English". "sus" is typically used in Europe while "sis" is used in the US. Either is correct. I have elaborated here: http://ls-bxo.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=4 -Wanderer X 13:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to my British English dictionaries, 'slerosis' is the only spelling. I can't find any evidence that the 'sus' spelling is used British English at all.--Jcvamp 06:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Stühmer, A.: Balanitis xerotica obliterans (post-operationem) und ihre Beziehungen zur “Kraurosis glandis et praeputii penis,” Arch f. Dermat. u. Syph. 156:613, 1928.

[1]