No abstract

Primary focal hyperhidrosis is a common disorder for which treatment is often a therapeutic challenge. A systematic review of current literature on the various treatment modalities for primary focal hyperhidrosis was performed and a step-by-step approach for the different types of primary focal hyperhidrosis (axillary, palmar, plantar and craniofacial) was established. Non-surgical treatments (aluminium salts, local and systemic anticholinergics, botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) injections and iontophoresis) are adequately supported by the current literature. More invasive surgical procedures (suction curettage and sympathetic denervation) have also been extensively investigated, and can offer a more definitive solution for cases of hyperhidrosis that are unresponsive to non-surgical treatments. There is no consensus on specific techniques for sympathetic denervation, and this issue should be further examined by meta-analysis. There are numerous treatment options available to improve the quality of life (QOL) of the hyperhidrosis patient. In practice, however, the challenge for the dermatologist remains to evaluate the severity of hyperhidrosis to achieve the best therapeutic outcome, this can be done most effectively using the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS).

IMPORTANCE Skin cancer is the most frequent cancer type. It remains unknown if and how screening programs can be organized in a cost-effective manner. OBJECTIVE To compare the 2 screening strategies of systematic total-body examination (TBE) and lesion-directed screening (LDS), with a focus on the participation rate, detection rate, anxiety, and cost. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Population-based cross-sectional screenings by a team of 6 dermatologists were organized in 2 sociodemographically similar regions. The TBE was organized in a community of 9325 inhabitants 18 years and older (Wichelen, East Flanders, Belgium) during a 5-day screening (March 14-18, 2014). The LDS was organized in a sociodemographically comparable community (Nevele, East Flanders, Belgium) of 9484 adult inhabitants during a 4-day screening (April 22 and 25-27, 2014). The first population received a personal invitation for a standard TBE. In the second population, individuals were invited for an LDS if they had a lesion meeting 1 or more of the following criteria: ABCD rule (A, asymmetry; B, borders; C, colors; and D, differential structures), ugly duckling sign, new lesion lasting longer than 4 weeks, or red nonhealing lesions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES In total, 1982 individuals were screened, and 47 skin cancers (2.4%) were histologically confirmed, including 9 melanomas (0.5%), 37 basal cell carcinomas (1.9%), and 1 squamous cell carcinoma or Bowen disease (0.1%). RESULTS The positive predictive value for all suspicious lesions was 56.6% (47 of 83). The participation rate was 17.9% (1668 of 9325) in the TBE group vs 3.3% (314 of 9484) in the LDS group (P < .01). The skin cancer detection rate per 100 participants did not differ significantly between the 2 groups, with rates of 2.3% (39 of 1668) in the TBE group vs 3.2% (8 of 248) in the LDS group (P = .40). The operational effectiveness per 100 invitees was 0.4% (39 of 9325) in the TBE group vs 0.1% (8 of 9484) in the LDS group (P < .01). In addition, LDS was 5.6 times less time consuming than TBE. Participants in the LDS group had significantly higher baseline anxiety levels compared with participants in the TBE group (3.7 vs 3.3 points on a visual analog scale, P < .01). In screenees without a suspicious lesion, anxiety levels significantly dropped after screening. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Total-body examination yielded a higher absolute number of skin cancers. Lesion-directed screening had a similar detection rate of 3.2% (8 of 248) but was 5.6 times less time consuming. When performed by dermatologists, LDS is an acceptable alternative screening method in health care systems with limited budgets or long waiting lists.

No abstract

We found that tumour size and aggressive histology are the strongest indication criteria for MMS. Recurrence and aggressive histology are predictors for extensive subclinical spread but not for two or more rounds of MMS. Evidence-based indications for MMS are necessary to ensure cost-effective management of BCC.