Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome with cutaneous involvement: a comparative review of 32 cases
  1. Faisal Inayat1,
  2. Stacey S O’Neill2,
  3. Fahad Zafar3,
  4. Sindhuja Marupudi2 and
  5. Izzah Vasim2
  1. 1 Allama Iqbal Medical College, Lahore, Pakistan
  2. 2 Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
  3. 3 King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Pakistan
  1. Correspondence to Dr Faisal Inayat, faisalinayat{at}


Although idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is uncommon, we studied the clinical characteristics of this disorder in patients with cutaneous involvement. We chronicle the case of a patient with diffuse skin rash due to idiopathic HES from our clinical experience. Furthermore, a systematic literature search of the medical databases PubMed and Google Scholar was conducted. A total of 32 cases fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The data on patients’ characteristics, epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment and outcome were collected and analysed. This review illustrates that physicians should maintain a high index of clinical suspicion for idiopathic HES in patients presenting with dermatological lesions and hypereosinophilia, without an obvious cause. Randomised clinical trials are warranted to outline a generalised and efficient therapeutic approach in these patients. Additionally, this paper highlights the need for population-based studies to delineate the magnitude and scope of this association.

  • haematology (incl blood transfusion)
  • dermatology
  • skin
  • medical management
  • general practice/family

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors FI: designed the study, performed the systematic literature review, drafted the manuscript, formulated the data table, revised the manuscript and gave the final approval for the version published. SSO: drafted and reviewed the manuscript. FZ: drafted the manuscript, performed the literature search, formulated the data table and contributed to the discussion. SM: revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content. IV: reviewed the manuscript and suggested pertinent modifications.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors .

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.