Reduced stratum corneum hydration correlates with pruritus in patients on maintenance haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, and may be alleviated by simple emollient therapy.

A perforating disorder of the skin developing in association with chronic renal failure and often also diabetes, acquired perforating dermatosis (APD), affects up to 10% of patients receiving maintenance haemodialysis in North America. The prevalence of this condition in British dialysis patients has not yet been ascertained. We have undertaken a skin survey of our dialysis population (n = 80) to determine the prevalence and clinical presentation of APD, with subsequent assessment of disease management and outcome. Of 72 patients who participated in the survey, eight were found to have APD, seven of whom were also diabetic. Skin lesions had developed pre-dialysis in two patients, on commencement of dialysis in one, and after 1-3 years on dialysis in the remaining five. Patients typically presented with pruritic dome-shaped papules with central crusts arising on the trunk and extensor limb surfaces. Histological examination of biopsy specimens revealed two types of lesion, typified by either narrow or broad ulcer craters, each showing perforation of both collagen and elastic fibres. Topical/intradermal steroid or topical retinoid were effective therapies in certain of our patients. Clinical clearance was achieved after 3-12 months of treatment in five patients with improvement in the remaining two patients who received treatment. Of the four patients who were alive at 2-year review, three remained clear, while one patient continued to develop new lesions. We report an 11% prevalence of APD in our dialysis population, suggesting the disorder to be as prevalent in patients with chronic renal failure in Britain as in North America. An association of the disorder with long-standing diabetes was confirmed.

Dermatology in-patient units are frequently threatened with reduction or closure, yet there are few objective data regarding the nature and use of in-patient management with which to assess their value. We have surveyed 300 patients admitted during March 1997 to dermatology units throughout Scotland and Northern England, to establish their clinical and social profile, and the outcome of admission. All departments provided phototherapy and out-patient treatment services, and 84% of those admitted lived within an hour's travel of one of these. Three diagnostic groups (psoriasis, eczema and leg ulcers) accounted for 83% of in-patient days. Patients were admitted principally because of disease severity but many, including half of those with psoriasis, had concurrent medical problems such as alcohol abuse, psychiatric disorder or arthropathy. Many patients with psoriasis and leg ulcers were from socially deprived areas, as defined by low Carstairs index scores, and a similar proportion received income support. Eighteen per cent of patients, mainly those with acute disorders, would have needed admission irrespective of dermatology bed availability. Out-patient management was considered the next best alternative for only 28% of patients, and many patients would have been expected to treat themselves. By contrast, 84% of patients admitted were cleared or substantially improved, or had procedures completed as planned, and another 12% were partially improved. Outcomes were particularly good in psoriasis, eczema and infection groups. We have demonstrated that in-patient management is highly effective in providing remission in chronic skin disease, and our survey also suggests that concomitant disability or social factors mean that for many such patients ambulatory care cannot replace this service.

A perforating disorder of the skin developing in association with chronic renal failure and often also diabetes, acquired perforating dermatosis (APD), affects up to 10% of patients receiving maintenance haemodialysis in North America. The prevalence of this condition in British dialysis patients has not yet been ascertained. We have undertaken a skin survey of our dialysis population (n = 80) to determine the prevalence and clinical presentation of APD, with subsequent assessment of disease management and outcome. Of 72 patients who participated in the survey, eight were found to have APD, seven of whom were also diabetic. Skin lesions had developed pre-dialysis in two patients, on commencement of dialysis in one, and after 1-3 years on dialysis in the remaining five. Patients typically presented with pruritic dome-shaped papules with central crusts arising on the trunk and extensor limb surfaces. Histological examination of biopsy specimens revealed two types of lesion, typified by either narrow or broad ulcer craters, each showing perforation of both collagen and elastic fibres. Topical/intradermal steroid or topical retinoid were effective therapies in certain of our patients. Clinical clearance was achieved after 3-12 months of treatment in five patients with improvement in the remaining two patients who received treatment. Of the four patients who were alive at 2-year review, three remained clear, while one patient continued to develop new lesions. We report an 11% prevalence of APD in our dialysis population, suggesting the disorder to be as prevalent in patients with chronic renal failure in Britain as in North America. An association of the disorder with long-standing diabetes was confirmed.

We report two men who developed a transient perforating disorder characterized by transepidermal elimination of negatively birefringent needle-shaped crystals similar to monosodium urate. This striking clinical presentation has not previously been described and we propose that it be added to the group of diseases known as the primary perforating disorders.