BackgroundNegative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for postsurgical incision treatment has demonstrated benefits. A prospective randomized study was developed including 32 patients who underwent bilateral breast reduction mammoplasty. Patients served as their own control and received NPWT to one breast and fixation strips to the other breast.MethodsThe primary outcome was the number of wound healing complications within 21 days when comparing NPWT treatment with fixation strips. The secondary outcome was aesthetic appearance and quality of scarring using questionnaires [visual analogue scale (VAS) and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS)] scored at day 42-, 90-, 180- and 365-day follow-up using additional scar measurement modalities, such as viscoelasticity.ResultsFor the 32 included patients, the number of wound complications was significantly lower (p < 0.004) for the NPWT treated sites compared to fixation strips. POSAS and VAS scores at 42 and 90 days revealed a significantly better quality of scarring in the NPWT treatment breasts than in fixation strips. At 180-day follow-up, there was a significant improvement in VAS scores, as well as a comparable improvement in POSAS scores. No consistent significant improvement in scar quality was demonstrated with the assays that were used.ConclusionsOur study showed less complications and a significant improvement in quality of scarring in favor of the NPWT-treated sites. The results indicate NPWT to be an attractive option for these patients.Level of Evidence IIThis journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Evidence-based guidance is needed to inform clinicians on risk factor, adverse effects, complications and contraindications. ABPI values need to be specified and details should be given on the type of compression that is safe to use. Ongoing research challenges the present recommendations, shifting some contraindications into a list of potential indications. Complications of compression can be prevented when adequate assessment is performed and clinicians are skilled in applying compression.

Background: Genetic and environmental factors influence stratum corneum (SC) barrier properties and function. Researchers increasingly focus on biophysical studies that may help clinicians provide their patients with an informed choice on tailormade skincare. This literature review on skin barrier properties comparing different ethnic populations aims to offer insights into the information's clinical relevance. Methods: A literature review followed by panel discussions and an online review process aimed to answer the questions: Are there racial/ethnic differences in the SC barrier structure and healthy skin barrier function? Is there a need for specific cleansers and moisturizers? Results: Ethnic categories based on race and ethnicity are often not well defined and inconsistent across different studies. Studies comparing ethnic groups' physical and biochemical skin barrier properties have reported differences in transepidermal water loss (TEWL), skin lipid levels, pH, and mast cell granule size. However, these studies frequently had methodological flaws, mainly were small, and demonstrated conflicting results. The literature suggests racial/ethnic variations in ceramide content, SC structure, and filaggrin mutations. Furthermore, studies have shown a greater burden of pruritus and atopic dermatitis among Black populations. Data on barrier properties in Hispanic/LatinX and South Asian populations are lacking. Conclusion:Robust comparative studies are needed to understand these basic concepts to help tailor skincare and skin of color patients' education.

Compression was shown to be feasible for elderly community care patients in Hong Kong and is currently implemented as part of standard venous leg ulcer treatment.

No abstract

This study was supported by a scientific grant from Lohmann & Rauscher.

Background Acne vulgaris (acne), a common inflammatory skin disorder, has its peak incidence between 14 and 19 years of age, with girls frequently developing acne earlier than boys. Over recent years, persistent acne is becoming more prevalent in adult women. Objectives This review and panel discussion addresses challenges in acne management, particularly in adult women. The role which nonprescription acne treatment can play is explored when used as monotherapy or as an adjunctive treatment for acne of all severity. Methods The best available evidence on nonprescription acne treatment was coupled with the opinion of an international expert panel of dermatologists to adopt statements and recommendations discussed in this review. Results All severity of acne has a significant burden on patients. Addressing environmental factors that are important for the individual with acne may help to educate, prevent, effectively manage, and maintain acne, as per the panel. They agreed that the adult female acne population has unique needs because of their aging skin and social environment. Nonprescription acne treatment products may help to balance the efficacy and tolerability of prescription acne treatment. Currently, there are no specific guidelines for how to use nonprescription acne treatment products in these patients. Conclusion The panel agreed that guidelines including nonprescription acne treatment either as monotherapy for mild acne or in combination with prescription treatments for more severe acne would address a significant unmet need.

As this is an evolving medical field, clinical evidence often lacks robustness. Studies and clinical experience suggest that feminine genital rejuvenation using energy-based devices seems an attractive option for patients with mild-to-moderate medical conditions. The treatment can be safely and effectively delivered by trained staff as part of the comprehensive care, that is, currently available to women.