Summary Background Over the last few years, several articles on dermoscopy of non‐neoplastic dermatoses have been published, yet there is poor consistency in the terminology among different studies. Objectives We aimed to standardize the dermoscopic terminology and identify basic parameters to evaluate in non‐neoplastic dermatoses through an expert consensus. Methods The modified Delphi method was followed, with two phases: (i) identification of a list of possible items based on a systematic literature review and (ii) selection of parameters by a panel of experts through a three‐step iterative procedure (blinded e‐mail interaction in rounds 1 and 3 and a face‐to‐face meeting in round 2). Initial panellists were recruited via e‐mail from all over the world based on their expertise on dermoscopy of non‐neoplastic dermatoses. Results Twenty‐four international experts took part in all rounds of the consensus and 13 further international participants were also involved in round 2. Five standardized basic parameters were identified: (i) vessels (including morphology and distribution); (ii) scales (including colour and distribution); (iii) follicular findings; (iv) ‘other structures’ (including colour and morphology); and (v) ‘specific clues’. For each of them, possible variables were selected, with a total of 31 different subitems reaching agreement at the end of the consensus (all of the 29 proposed initially plus two more added in the course of the consensus procedure). Conclusions This expert consensus provides a set of standardized basic dermoscopic parameters to follow when evaluating inflammatory, infiltrative and infectious dermatoses. This tool, if adopted by clinicians and researchers in this field, is likely to enhance the reproducibility and comparability of existing and future research findings and uniformly expand the universal knowledge on dermoscopy in general dermatology. What's already known about this topic? Over the last few years, several papers have been published attempting to describe the dermoscopic features of non‐neoplastic dermatoses, yet there is poor consistency in the terminology among different studies. What does this study add? The present expert consensus provides a set of standardized basic dermoscopic parameters to follow when evaluating inflammatory, infiltrative and infectious dermatoses. This consensus should enhance the reproducibility and comparability of existing and future research findings and uniformly expand the universal knowledge on dermoscopy in general dermatology.

Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic inflammatory and immune-mediated disease that affects the skin, hair, nails and mucous membranes. Although there is a broad clinical spectrum of lichen planus manifestations, the skin and oral cavity remain the major sites of involvement. A group of European dermatologists with a long-standing interest and expertise in lichen planus has sought to define therapeutic guidelines for the management of patients with LP. The clinical features, diagnosis and possible medications that clinicians can use, in order to control the disease, will be reviewed in this manuscript.The revised final version of the lichen planus guideline was passed on to the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) for a final consensus with the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV).

No abstract

Periodontitis may be associated with psoriasis but further studies are required to elucidate their relationship in the context of the biologic plausibility.

Our study demonstrated that DLPDT is similar to CPDT in terms of long-term efficacy and recurrence rates in the treatment of face and scalp AKs. DLPDT demonstrated a better tolerability profile as it was associated with lower pain and less severe adverse events.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundBiologic agents are routinely used in the treatment of severe psoriasis. The evaluation of treatment response is mainly based on the physician’s global clinical assessment.ObjectiveTo investigate whether dermoscopy might enhance the assessment of response of psoriasis to treatment with biologic agents.MethodsPatients with severe psoriasis scheduled to receive a biologic agent were enrolled in the study. A target lesion from each patient was clinically and dermoscopically documented at baseline and after one, two and six months. The clinical response was evaluated by the recruiting clinicians at all visits, while dermoscopic images were evaluated by two independent investigators, blinded to the clinical information. Chi Square test was used for cross-tabulation comparisons, while odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals and p values were calculated using univariate logistic regression.ResultsOverall, there was a significant correlation between clinical response and vessel distribution at all time points: a regular vessel distribution correlated with no response, a clustered distribution with partial response, and the dermoscopic absence of vessels with complete response. The presence of dermoscopic hemorrhagic dots was a potent predictor of favorable clinical response at the subsequent visit at all time points. Among lesions initially clinically responding and later recurring, 87.5% displayed dermoscopic dotted vessels despite the macroscopic remission.ConclusionDermoscopy might be a useful additional tool for evaluating the response of psoriatic patients to biologic agents. Hemorrhagic dots represent an early predictor of clinical response, while the persistence or reappearance of dotted vessels might predict clinical persistence or recurrence, respectively.