Introduction Lipedema is a chronic, progressive condition that can result in considerable disability. In 2011, the Dutch Society of Dermatology and Venereology organized a task force to create guidelines on lipedema, using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health of the World Health Organization. Guideline development Clinical questions on significant issues in lipedema care were proposed, involving (1) making the diagnosis of lipedema; (2) clinimetric measurements for early detection and adequate follow-up; and (3) treatment. A systematic review of literature published up to June 2013 was conducted. Based on available evidence and experience of the task force, answers were formed and recommendations were stated. The guidelines define criteria to make a medical diagnosis of lipedema, a minimum data set of (repeated) clinical measurements that should be used to ensure early detection and an individually outlined follow-up plan, pillars on which conservative treatment should be based and recommendations on surgical treatment options. Conclusions Little consistent information concerning either diagnostics or therapy can be found in the literature. It is likely that lipedema is frequently misdiagnosed or wrongly diagnosed as only an aesthetic problem and therefore under- or mis-treated. Treatment is divided into conservative and chirurgic treatment. The only available technique to correct the abnormal adipose tissue is surgery. Recommendations To ensure early detection and an individually outlined follow-up, the committee advises the use of a minimum data set of (repeated) measurements of waist circumference, circumference of involved limbs, body mass index and scoring of the level of daily practice and psychosocial distress. Promotion of a healthy lifestyle with individually adjusted weight control measures, graded activity training programs, edema reduction, and other supportive measures are pillars of conservative therapy. Tumescent liposuction is the treatment of choice for patients with a suitable health profile and/or inadequate response to conservative and supportive measures.

BACKGROUND Lipedema is a chronic, progressive disorder of subcutaneous adipose tissue that usually affects the lower extremities of women. Also known as “two-body syndrome,” the fat accumulations in lipedema are unsightly and painful. The disorder is well-known in Europe but is largely unrecognized and underdiagnosed in the United States. OBJECTIVE To hold the First International Consensus Conference on Lipedema with the purpose of reviewing current European guidelines and the literature regarding the long-term benefits that have been reported to occur after lymph-sparing liposuction for lipedema using tumescent local anesthesia. METHODS International experts on liposuction for lipedema were convened as part of the First International Congress on Lipedema in Vienna, Austria, June 9 to 10, 2017. RESULTS Multiple studies from Germany have reported long-term benefits for as long as 8 years after liposuction for lipedema using tumescent local anesthesia. CONCLUSION Lymph-sparing liposuction using tumescent local anesthesia is currently the only effective treatment for lipedema.

Organ transplant recipients (OTRs) have a 100‐fold increased risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). We prospectively evaluated the association between β genus human papillomaviruses (βPV) and keratinocyte carcinoma in OTRs. Two OTR cohorts without cSCC were assembled: cohort 1 was transplanted in 2003‐2006 (n = 274) and cohort 2 was transplanted in 1986‐2002 (n = 352). Participants were followed until death or cessation of follow‐up in 2016. βPV infection was assessed in eyebrow hair by using polymerase chain reaction–based methods. βPV IgG seroresponses were determined with multiplex serology. A competing risk model with delayed entry was used to estimate cumulative incidence of histologically proven cSCC and the effect of βPV by using a multivariable Cox regression model. Results are reported as adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). OTRs with 5 or more different βPV types in eyebrow hair had 1.7 times the risk of cSCC vs OTRs with 0 to 4 different types (HR 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.1‐2.6). A similar risk was seen with high βPV loads (HR 1.8, 95% confidence interval 1.2‐2.8). No significant associations were seen between serum antibodies and cSCC or between βPV and basal cell carcinoma. The diversity and load of βPV types in eyebrow hair are associated with cSCC risk in OTRs, providing evidence that βPV is associated with cSCC carcinogenesis and may present a target for future preventive strategies.

BACKGROUND There is an increasing demand for safety standards for cosmetic treatments. With regard to liposuction, interdisciplinary consensus is lacking, especially regarding treatment setting and physician specialty. OBJECTIVE A solid, independent interpretation of scientific data on safety requires a systematic approach, which is the aim of this study. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted for safety studies about liposuction through April 2017. Fatalities and/or reported serious adverse events served as outcome measures for safety. RESULTS Twenty-four studies were included. Factors that contributed to increased serious complication and mortality risk were: use of the (super)wet technique; use of systemic anesthetics, especially general anesthesia and intravenous sedation; execution by a plastic surgeon; execution in an operating room; and combination with other procedures. CONCLUSION Liposuction using tumescent local anesthesia has been shown to be the safest method of fat removal, especially if no or only minimal systemic anesthesia is used. Performance of this technique in an office-based setting has been proven to be safe beyond doubt. When systemic anesthesia is used, an outpatient or ambulatory surgery facility seems also safe. Regardless of the physician specialty, knowledge and training on the execution of the tumescent procedure are vital to ensure optimal safety.