Telediagnosis and face-to-face diagnosis reliability for melanocytic and non-melanocytic ‘pink’ lesions

Challenges in Teledermoscopy Diagnostic Outcome Studies: Scoping Review of Heterogeneous Study Characteristics

BACKGROUND

Teledermoscopy has demonstrated benefits such as decreased costs and enhanced access to dermatology care for skin cancer detection. However, the heterogeneity among teledermoscopy studies hinders the systematic reviews' synopsis of diagnostic outcomes, impeding trust and adoption in general practice and limiting overall health care benefits.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to improve understanding and standardization of teledermoscopy diagnostic studies, by identifying and categorizing study characteristics contributing to heterogeneity. Subsequently, the variability and consistency of these characteristics were assessed.

METHODS

A review of systematic reviews regarding the diagnostic outcomes of teledermoscopy was performed to discern reported study characteristics contributing to heterogeneity. These characteristics were thematically grouped into 3 domains (population, index test, and reference standard), forming a data extraction framework. A scoping review on teledermoscopy diagnostic outcomes studies was performed, guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. Data pertaining to study characteristics from included studies were extracted and analyzed through descriptive content analysis. Systematic reviews' reference lists validated the scoping review query.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 4 systematic reviews, revealing 15 heterogeneous studies across the population, index test, and reference standard domains. The scoping review identified 49 studies, with 27 overlapping with the systematic reviews. Population characteristics varied, with one-third (16/49, 33%) of studies reporting fewer than 100 samples; most studies (41/49, 84%) reported on the type of lesion, and most (20/49, 41%) teledermoscopy consultations took place in secondary care. One-fifth (11/49, 22%) did not describe inclusion or exclusion criteria, or the criteria varied highly. Index test characteristics showed differences in clinical expertise, profession, and training in dermatoscopic photography, and 59% (29/49) did not report on 1 or more index test characteristics. Image quality and clinical information reporting likewise varied. Reference standard characteristics involved teledermatologists' assessment, but 16 studies did not report teledermatologists' experience levels. Most studies (26/49, 53%) used histopathology as a gold standard.

CONCLUSIONS

The heterogeneity in the population, index tests, and reference standard domains across teledermoscopy diagnostic outcome studies underscores the need for standardized reporting. This hinders the synopsis of teledermoscopy diagnostic outcomes in systematic reviews and limits the integration of research results into practice. Adopting a (tailored) STARD (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) checklist for teledermoscopy diagnostic outcome studies is recommended to enhance the consistency and comparability of outcomes. We suggest performing a Delphi study to gather consensus on the tailored STARD guideline.

DMpDP: a Diagnostic Multiple-patient DermoFeature Profile store-and-forward teledermoscopy system

Telehealth demand is rapidly growing along with the necessity of providing wide-scale services covering multiple patients at the same time. In this work, the development of a store-and-forward (SAF) teledermoscopy system was considered. The dermoFeatures profile (DP) was proposed to decrease the size of the original dermoscopy image using its most significant features in the form of a newly generated diagonal alignment to generate a small-sized image DP, which is based on the extraction of a weighted intensity-difference frequency (WIDF) features along with morphological features (MOFs). These DPs were assembled to establish a Diagnostic Multiple-patient DermoFeature Profile (DMpDP). Different arrangements are proposed, namely the horizontally aligned, the diagonal-based, and the sequential-based DMpDPs to support the SAF systems. The DMpDPs are then embedded in a recorded patient-information signal (RPS) using a weight factor β to boost the transmitted patient-information signal. The effect of the different transform domains, β values, and number of DPs within the DMpDP were investigated in terms of the diagnostic classification accuracy at the receiver based on the extracted DPs, along with the recorded signal quality evaluation metrics of the recovered RPS. The sequential-based DMpDP achieved the highest classification accuracy, under - 5 dB additive white Gaussian noise, with a realized signal-to-noise ratio of 98.79% during the transmission of 248 DPs using β = 100, and spectral subtraction filtering.

Frequency of Publication of Dermoscopic Images in Inter-observer Studies: A Systematic Review

Research interest in dermoscopy is increasing, but the complete dermoscopic image sets used in inter-observer studies of skin tumours are not often shared in research publications. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse what proportion of images depicting skin tumours are published in studies investigating inter-observer variations in the assessment of dermoscopic features and/or patterns. Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus databases were screened for eligible studies published from inception to 2 July 2020. For included studies the proportion of lesion images presented in the papers and/or supplements was extracted. A total of 61 studies (53 original studies and 8 shorter reports (i.e. research letters or concise reports)). published in the period 1997 to 2020 were included. These studies combined included 14,124 skin tumours, of which 373 (3%) images were published. This systematic review highlights that the vast majority of images included in dermoscopy research are not published. Data sharing should be a requirement for future studies, and must be enabled and standardized by the dermatology research community and editorial offices.

Impact of delay in follow-up due to COVID-19 pandemic on skin cancer progression: a real-life experience from an Italian hub hospital

Background

The COVID‐19 pandemic required the setting of a national lockdown in Italy from March 9, 2020, until May 18, 2020; therefore, most of the non‐COVID‐19 activities were postponed. As a consequence, many follow‐up visits in patients with previously excised skin cancers were delayed. The aim of this retrospective real‐life case–control study is demonstrating that delay in follow‐up led to an increased incidence of advanced melanoma and keratinocyte cancers on the total of surgically excised skin cancers.

Methods

The incidence of excised advanced melanoma and keratinocyte cancers in our dermato‐surgery division in the period May 18 to November 18, 2020, was compared to the same time span of 2019. All data were collected from the electronic database of our department. Odds ratio with 95% confidence interval was used to assess the risk of excised advanced skin cancers in 2020 compared to 2019.

Results

From May to November 2019, we performed 265 surgical excisions, while during the pandemic in 2020, we completed 280 surgeries. The number of advanced skin cancers excised between May 18 and November 18, 2020, was significantly higher compared with the same period in 2019 (54 vs. 22, OR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.56–4.47; P = 0.0003). Significant differences were also observed regarding the number of surgically removed advanced BCCs (OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.14–4.07; P = 0.0187) and advanced SCCs (OR 4.60; 95% CI 1.31–16.18; P = 0.0175).

Conclusion

These results confirm that delay in follow‐up and, consequently, postponed surgical excisions are related to an increased incidence of advanced skin tumors, resulting in poorer prognosis lifelong. Follow‐up visits should be carried on even during COVID‐19 pandemic, avoiding significant delays as much as possible.

Visual inspection for diagnosing cutaneous melanoma in adults

BACKGROUND

Melanoma has one of the fastest rising incidence rates of any cancer. It accounts for a small percentage of skin cancer cases but is responsible for the majority of skin cancer deaths. History-taking and visual inspection of a suspicious lesion by a clinician is usually the first in a series of 'tests' to diagnose skin cancer. Establishing the accuracy of visual inspection alone is critical to understating the potential contribution of additional tests to assist in the diagnosis of melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection for the detection of cutaneous invasive melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants in adults with limited prior testing and in those referred for further evaluation of a suspicious lesion. Studies were separated according to whether the diagnosis was recorded face-to-face (in-person) or based on remote (image-based) assessment.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: CENTRAL; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated visual inspection in adults with lesions suspicious for melanoma, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up. We excluded studies reporting data for 'clinical diagnosis' where dermoscopy may or may not have been used.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where information related to the target condition or diagnostic threshold were missing. We estimated summary sensitivities and specificities per algorithm and threshold using the bivariate hierarchical model. We investigated the impact of: in-person test interpretation; use of a purposely developed algorithm to assist diagnosis; and observer expertise.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 publications reporting on a total of 51 study cohorts with 34,351 lesions (including 2499 cases), providing 134 datasets for visual inspection. Across almost all study quality domains, the majority of study reports provided insufficient information to allow us to judge the risk of bias, while in three of four domains that we assessed we scored concerns regarding applicability of study findings as 'high'. Selective participant recruitment, lack of detail regarding the threshold for deciding on a positive test result, and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.Attempts to analyse studies by degree of prior testing were hampered by a lack of relevant information and by the restricted inclusion of lesions selected for biopsy or excision. Accuracy was generally much higher for in-person diagnosis compared to image-based evaluations (relative diagnostic odds ratio of 8.54, 95% CI 2.89 to 25.3, P < 0.001). Meta-analysis of in-person evaluations that could be clearly placed on the clinical pathway showed a general trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, with the highest sensitivity (92.4%, 95% CI 26.2% to 99.8%) and lowest specificity (79.7%, 95% CI 73.7% to 84.7%) observed in participants with limited prior testing (n = 3 datasets). Summary sensitivities were lower for those referred for specialist assessment but with much higher specificities (e.g. sensitivity 76.7%, 95% CI 61.7% to 87.1%) and specificity 95.7%, 95% CI 89.7% to 98.3%) for lesions selected for excision, n = 8 datasets). These differences may be related to differences in the spectrum of included lesions, differences in the definition of a positive test result, or to variations in observer expertise. We did not find clear evidence that accuracy is improved by the use of any algorithm to assist diagnosis in all settings. Attempts to examine the effect of observer expertise in melanoma diagnosis were hindered due to poor reporting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Visual inspection is a fundamental component of the assessment of a suspicious skin lesion; however, the evidence suggests that melanomas will be missed if visual inspection is used on its own. The evidence to support its accuracy in the range of settings in which it is used is flawed and very poorly reported. Although published algorithms do not appear to improve accuracy, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the 'no algorithm' approach should be preferred in all settings. Despite the volume of research evaluating visual inspection, further prospective evaluation of the potential added value of using established algorithms according to the prior testing or diagnostic difficulty of lesions may be warranted.

Teledermatology for diagnosing skin cancer in adults

BACKGROUND

Early accurate detection of all skin cancer types is essential to guide appropriate management and to improve morbidity and survival. Melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) are high-risk skin cancers which have the potential to metastasise and ultimately lead to death, whereas basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is usually localised with potential to infiltrate and damage surrounding tissue. Anxiety around missing early curable cases needs to be balanced against inappropriate referral and unnecessary excision of benign lesions. Teledermatology provides a way for generalist clinicians to access the opinion of a specialist dermatologist for skin lesions that they consider to be suspicious without referring the patients through the normal referral pathway. Teledermatology consultations can be 'store-and-forward' with electronic digital images of a lesion sent to a dermatologist for review at a later time, or can be live and interactive consultations using videoconferencing to connect the patient, referrer and dermatologist in real time.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of teledermatology for the detection of any skin cancer (melanoma, BCC or cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC)) in adults, and to compare its accuracy with that of in-person diagnosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CPCI, Zetoc, Science Citation Index, US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating skin cancer diagnosis for teledermatology alone, or in comparison with face-to-face diagnosis by a specialist clinician, compared with a reference standard of histological confirmation or clinical follow-up and expert opinion. We also included studies evaluating the referral accuracy of teledermatology compared with a reference standard of face-to-face diagnosis by a specialist clinician.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where there were information related to the target condition of any skin cancer missing. Data permitting, we estimated summary sensitivities and specificities using the bivariate hierarchical model. Due to the scarcity of data, we undertook no covariate investigations for this review. For illustrative purposes, we plotted estimates of sensitivity and specificity on coupled forest plots for diagnostic threshold and target condition under consideration.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 22 studies reporting diagnostic accuracy data for 4057 lesions and 879 malignant cases (16 studies) and referral accuracy data for reported data for 1449 lesions and 270 'positive' cases as determined by the reference standard face-to-face decision (six studies). Methodological quality was variable with poor reporting hindering assessment. The overall risk of bias was high or unclear for participant selection, reference standard, and participant flow and timing in at least half of all studies; the majority were at low risk of bias for the index test. The applicability of study findings were of high or unclear concern for most studies in all domains assessed due to the recruitment of participants from secondary care settings or specialist clinics rather than from primary or community-based settings in which teledermatology is more likely to be used and due to the acquisition of lesion images by dermatologists or in specialist imaging units rather than by primary care clinicians.Seven studies provided data for the primary target condition of any skin cancer (1588 lesions and 638 malignancies). For the correct diagnosis of lesions as malignant using photographic images, summary sensitivity was 94.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90.1% to 97.4%) and summary specificity was 84.3% (95% CI 48.5% to 96.8%) (from four studies). Individual study estimates using dermoscopic images or a combination of photographic and dermoscopic images generally suggested similarly high sensitivities with highly variable specificities. Limited comparative data suggested similar diagnostic accuracy between teledermatology assessment and in-person diagnosis by a dermatologist; however, data were too scarce to draw firm conclusions. For the detection of invasive melanoma or atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants both sensitivities and specificities were more variable. Sensitivities ranged from 59% (95% CI 42% to 74%) to 100% (95% CI 48% to 100%) and specificities from 30% (95% CI 22% to 40%) to 100% (95% CI 93% to 100%), with reported diagnostic thresholds including the correct diagnosis of melanoma, classification of lesions as 'atypical' or 'typical, and the decision to refer or to excise a lesion.Referral accuracy data comparing teledermatology against a face-to-face reference standard suggested good agreement for lesions considered to require some positive action by face-to-face assessment (sensitivities of over 90%). For lesions considered of less concern when assessed face-to-face (e.g. for lesions not recommended for excision or referral), agreement was more variable with teledermatology specificities ranging from 57% (95% CI 39% to 73%) to 100% (95% CI 86% to 100%), suggesting that remote assessment is more likely recommend excision, referral or follow-up compared to in-person decisions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies were generally small and heterogeneous and methodological quality was difficult to judge due to poor reporting. Bearing in mind concerns regarding the applicability of study participants and of lesion image acquisition in specialist settings, our results suggest that teledermatology can correctly identify the majority of malignant lesions. Using a more widely defined threshold to identify 'possibly' malignant cases or lesions that should be considered for excision is likely to appropriately triage those lesions requiring face-to-face assessment by a specialist. Despite the increasing use of teledermatology on an international level, the evidence base to support its ability to accurately diagnose lesions and to triage lesions from primary to secondary care is lacking and further prospective and pragmatic evaluation is needed.

Dermoscopy, with and without visual inspection, for diagnosing melanoma in adults

BACKGROUND

Melanoma has one of the fastest rising incidence rates of any cancer. It accounts for a small percentage of skin cancer cases but is responsible for the majority of skin cancer deaths. Although history-taking and visual inspection of a suspicious lesion by a clinician are usually the first in a series of 'tests' to diagnose skin cancer, dermoscopy has become an important tool to assist diagnosis by specialist clinicians and is increasingly used in primary care settings. Dermoscopy is a magnification technique using visible light that allows more detailed examination of the skin compared to examination by the naked eye alone. Establishing the additive value of dermoscopy over and above visual inspection alone across a range of observers and settings is critical to understanding its contribution for the diagnosis of melanoma and to future understanding of the potential role of the growing number of other high-resolution image analysis techniques.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy alone, or when added to visual inspection of a skin lesion, for the detection of cutaneous invasive melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants in adults. We separated studies according to whether the diagnosis was recorded face-to-face (in-person), or based on remote (image-based), assessment.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies of any design that evaluated dermoscopy in adults with lesions suspicious for melanoma, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up. Data on the accuracy of visual inspection, to allow comparisons of tests, was included only if reported in the included studies of dermoscopy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where information related to the target condition or diagnostic threshold were missing. We estimated accuracy using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC),methods. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. To facilitate interpretation of results, we computed values of sensitivity at the point on the SROC curve with 80% fixed specificity and values of specificity with 80% fixed sensitivity. We investigated the impact of in-person test interpretation; use of a purposely developed algorithm to assist diagnosis; observer expertise; and dermoscopy training.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 104 study publications reporting on 103 study cohorts with 42,788 lesions (including 5700 cases), providing 354 datasets for dermoscopy. The risk of bias was mainly low for the index test and reference standard domains and mainly high or unclear for participant selection and participant flow. Concerns regarding the applicability of study findings were largely scored as 'high' concern in three of four domains assessed. Selective participant recruitment, lack of reproducibility of diagnostic thresholds and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.The accuracy of dermoscopy for the detection of invasive melanoma or atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants was reported in 86 datasets; 26 for evaluations conducted in person (dermoscopy added to visual inspection), and 60 for image-based evaluations (diagnosis based on interpretation of dermoscopic images). Analyses of studies by prior testing revealed no obvious effect on accuracy; analyses were hampered by the lack of studies in primary care, lack of relevant information and the restricted inclusion of lesions selected for biopsy or excision. Accuracy was higher for in-person diagnosis compared to image-based evaluations (relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) 4.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4 to 9.0; P < 0.001).We compared accuracy for (a), in-person evaluations of dermoscopy (26 evaluations; 23,169 lesions and 1664 melanomas),versus visual inspection alone (13 evaluations; 6740 lesions and 459 melanomas), and for (b), image-based evaluations of dermoscopy (60 evaluations; 13,475 lesions and 2851 melanomas),versus image-based visual inspection (11 evaluations; 1740 lesions and 305 melanomas). For both comparisons, meta-analysis found dermoscopy to be more accurate than visual inspection alone, with RDORs of (a), 4.7 (95% CI 3.0 to 7.5; P < 0.001), and (b), 5.6 (95% CI 3.7 to 8.5; P < 0.001). For a), the predicted difference in sensitivity at a fixed specificity of 80% was 16% (95% CI 8% to 23%; 92% for dermoscopy + visual inspection versus 76% for visual inspection), and predicted difference in specificity at a fixed sensitivity of 80% was 20% (95% CI 7% to 33%; 95% for dermoscopy + visual inspection versus 75% for visual inspection). For b) the predicted differences in sensitivity was 34% (95% CI 24% to 46%; 81% for dermoscopy versus 47% for visual inspection), at a fixed specificity of 80%, and predicted difference in specificity was 40% (95% CI 27% to 57%; 82% for dermoscopy versus 42% for visual inspection), at a fixed sensitivity of 80%.Using the median prevalence of disease in each set of studies ((a), 12% for in-person and (b), 24% for image-based), for a hypothetical population of 1000 lesions, an increase in sensitivity of (a), 16% (in-person), and (b), 34% (image-based), from using dermoscopy at a fixed specificity of 80% equates to a reduction in the number of melanomas missed of (a), 19 and (b), 81 with (a), 176 and (b), 152 false positive results. An increase in specificity of (a), 20% (in-person), and (b), 40% (image-based), at a fixed sensitivity of 80% equates to a reduction in the number of unnecessary excisions from using dermoscopy of (a), 176 and (b), 304 with (a), 24 and (b), 48 melanomas missed.The use of a named or published algorithm to assist dermoscopy interpretation (as opposed to no reported algorithm or reported use of pattern analysis), had no significant impact on accuracy either for in-person (RDOR 1.4, 95% CI 0.34 to 5.6; P = 0.17), or image-based (RDOR 1.4, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.3; P = 0.22), evaluations. This result was supported by subgroup analysis according to algorithm used. We observed higher accuracy for observers reported as having high experience and for those classed as 'expert consultants' in comparison to those considered to have less experience in dermoscopy, particularly for image-based evaluations. Evidence for the effect of dermoscopy training on test accuracy was very limited but suggested associated improvements in sensitivity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the observed limitations in the evidence base, dermoscopy is a valuable tool to support the visual inspection of a suspicious skin lesion for the detection of melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants, particularly in referred populations and in the hands of experienced users. Data to support its use in primary care are limited, however, it may assist in triaging suspicious lesions for urgent referral when employed by suitably trained clinicians. Formal algorithms may be of most use for dermoscopy training purposes and for less expert observers, however reliable data comparing approaches using dermoscopy in person are lacking.

Application of Teledermoscopy in the Diagnosis of Pigmented Lesions

Background

Dermatology, due to the peculiar characteristic of visual diagnosis, is suitable for the application of modern telemedicine techniques, such as mobile teledermoscopy.

Objectives

To evaluate the feasibility and reliability of the technique for the diagnosis of pigmented lesions.

Methods

Through the storage and routing method, 41 pigmented lesions were analyzed. After the selection of the lesions during the outpatient visit, the clinical and dermatoscopic images were obtained by the resident physician through the cellphone camera and sent to the assistant dermatologist by means of an application for exchange of messages between mobile platforms. Firstly, the assistant dermatologist described the visualized dermatoscopic structures and defined its diagnosis and conduct, based solely on the evaluation of the clinical and dermatoscopic images, without having the knowledge of the anamnesis data. Afterwards, the same assistant dermatologist evaluated the patient face to face, defining the dermatoscopic structures, diagnosis, and conduct. The data obtained through teledermoscopy and face-to-face assessments were compared and accuracy was defined as the concordance between the diagnoses.

Results

A match rate of 90% between teledermoscopic and face-to-face diagnosis was demonstrated (McNemar's statistical analysis, whose p value was 0.1366, showed no evidence to support the inferiority of the teledermoscopic method).

The use of teledermoscopy in the accurate identification of cancerous skin lesions in the adult population: A systematic review

Background The use of teledermoscopy in the diagnostic management of pre-cancerous and cancerous skin lesions involves digital dermoscopic images transmitted over telecommunication networks via email or web applications. Teledermoscopy may improve the accuracy in clinical diagnoses of melanoma skin cancer if integrated into electronic medical records and made available to rural communities, potentially leading to decreased morbidity and mortality. Objective and method The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic review of evidence on the use of teledermoscopy to improve the accuracy of skin lesion identification in adult populations. The PRISMA method guided the development of this systematic review. A total of seven scholarly databases were searched for articles published between the years of 2000 and 2015. All studies were critically appraised using the Rosswurm and Larrabee critique worksheet, placed in a matrix for comparison evaluating internal and external validity and inspected for homogeneity of findings. Results Sixteen articles met inclusion criteria for this review. A majority of the studies were cross-sectional and non-experimental. Ten of the 16 focused on interobserver concordance and diagnostic agreement between teledermoscopy and another comparator. Instrumentation in conducting the studies showed inconsistency with reported results. Discussion Higher level evidence is needed to support clinical application of teledermoscopy for accuracy of diagnostic measurement in the treatment of pre-cancerous and cancerous skin lesions in adults. Future research is needed to develop a standardized, reliable and valid measurement tool for implementation in clinical practice.

Improving Diagnostic Accuracy of Dermoscopically Equivocal Pink Cutaneous Lesions with Reflectance Confocal Microscopy in Telemedicine Settings: Double Reader Concordance Evaluation of 316 Cases

BACKGROUND

Solitary pink lesions in differential diagnosis with hypopigmented/amelanotic melanoma present a diagnostic challenge in daily practice and are regularly referred for second expert opinion. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) has been shown to improve diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopically equivocal pink lesions. No studies have been performed to evaluate the effect of adding a second expert reader and automatic removal of lesions with discordant management recommendations and its potential effect on diagnostic sensitivity and final management of these lesions in retrospective or telemedicine settings.

OBJECTIVE

To improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce potential mismanagement of dermoscopically equivocal pink cutaneous lesions by implementing double reader concordance evaluation of RCM images.

METHODS

316 dermoscopically equivocal pink lesions with dermoscopy-RCM image sets were evaluated retrospectively. Accuracy of three readers was evaluated by single reader evaluation of dermoscopy only and dermoscopy-RCM image sets and finally by double reader evaluation of dermoscopy-RCM image sets. Lesions with discordant diagnosis between two readers were automatically recommended for excision.

RESULTS

Dermoscopy only evaluation resulted in an overall sensitivity of 95.9% and specificity of 33.6%, with 1 of 12 amelanotic melanomas mismanaged. Dermoscopy-RCM image set single reader evaluation resulted in an overall sensitivity of 93.9% and overall specificity of 54.2%, with 1 of 12 melanomas mismanaged. Dermoscopy-RCM image set double reader concordance evaluation resulted in an overall sensitivity of 98.3% and specificity of 42.7%, with no amelanotic melanoma mismanagement.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of dermoscopy-RCM image sets of equivocal pink lesions by a single reader in telemedicine settings is limited by the potential for misdiagnosis of dangerous malignant lesions. Double reader concordance evaluation with automatic referral of lesions for removal in the case of discordant diagnosis improves the diagnostic sensitivity in this subset of lesions and reduce potential misdiagnosis in settings where a second expert opinion may be employed.

"Tape dermatoscopy": constructing a low-cost dermatoscope using a mobile phone, immersion fluid and transparent adhesive tape

Importance:

Medical professionals and indeed the general public have an increasing interest in the acquisition of dermatoscopic images of suspect or ambiguous skin lesions. To this end, good dermatoscopic image quality and low costs are important considerations.

Observations:

Images of seven lesions (seborrheic keratosis, melanoma in-situ, blue and dermal nevus, basal cell carcinoma and two squamous cell carcinomas) were taken. A novel technique of “tape dermatoscopy” involved:

Using immersion fluid (i.e., water, olive oil, disinfectant spray) placed on the flat or slightly elevated lesion;

Covering the lesion with transparent adhesive tape with lateral tension;

Using ambient indoor or outdoor lighting for illumination (rather than flash photography);

Positioning a photographic device at an angle of approximately 45° from the side of the lesion to avoid light reflection;

Recording a focused image with a mobile phone or digital camera at a distance of approximately 25–30 cm from the lesion; and

Enlarging the image on the screen of the device.

Essential dermatoscopic features enabling a correct diagnosis were visible in 6 of the 7 lesions. ‘Tape dermatoscopy” images of the lesions were compared to standard dermatoscopy (using a Fotofinder handyscope® in combination with a mobile phone). The latter confirmed the dermatoscopic features in six of seven lesions.

Conclusions and Relevance:

“Tape dermatoscopy” images can be recorded by medical personnel and even the general public without a dermatoscope. However, the limitations of this method are that images may be unfocused, exophytic tumors may be difficult to assess, excess pressure on tumoral blood vessels may lead to compression artefact, dermatoscopic features that are only visible under polarized light are unable to be detected (particularly “crystalline” or “chrysalis” structures) and tumors in certain anatomic locations may be difficult to assess (e.g., edges of nose, ears [demonstrated in one case], nails). Comparative prospective studies are necessary in order to test reproducibility of these preliminary findings, to establish special indications for the technique, and to develop guidelines for its effective use.

Collaborative authoring: a case study of the use of a wiki as a tool to keep systematic reviews up to date

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews are recognized as the most effective means of summarizing research evidence. However, they are limited by the time and effort required to keep them up to date. Wikis present a unique opportunity to facilitate collaboration among many authors. The purpose of this study was to examine the use of a wiki as an online collaborative tool for the updating of a type of systematic review known as a scoping review.

METHODS

An existing peer-reviewed scoping review on asynchronous telehealth was previously published on an open, publicly available wiki. Log file analysis, user questionnaires and content analysis were used to collect descriptive and evaluative data on the use of the site from 9 June 2009 to 10 April 2010. Blog postings from referring sites were also analyzed.

RESULTS

During the 10-month study period, there were a total of 1222 visits to the site, 3996 page views and 875 unique visitors from around the globe. Five unique visitors (0.6% of the total number of visitors) submitted a total of 6 contributions to the site: 3 contributions were made to the article itself, and 3 to the discussion pages. None of the contributions enhanced the evidence base of the scoping review. The commentary about the project in the blogosphere was positive, tempered with some skepticism.

INTERPRETATIONS

Despite the fact that wikis provide an easy-to-use, free and powerful means to edit information, fewer than 1% of visitors contributed content to the wiki. These results may be a function of limited interest in the topic area, the review methodology itself, lack of familiarity with the wiki, and the incentive structure of academic publishing. Controversial and timely topics in addition to incentives and organizational support for Web 2.0 impact metrics might motivate greater participation in online collaborative efforts to keep scientific knowledge up to date.

Teledermatology: from prevention to diagnosis of nonmelanoma and melanoma skin cancer

Telemedicine is a rapidly developing application of clinical medicine where medical information is transferred through interactive audiovisual media for the purpose of consulting remote medical procedures or examinations, reducing the time of consultation for patients. Teledermatology as an application of telemedicine was developed in 1995: it turns out to be a gradually more ordinary mean of delivering dermatologic healthcare worldwide and will almost certainly have a greater medical function in the future. In particular, teledermatology can aid in the prevention and diagnosis of nonmelanoma and melanoma skin cancer; telemedicine and teledermatology offer the opportunity to make available consultations with experts also by long distance. Overall, patients seem to accept teledermatology, considering it as an excellent mean to obtain healthcare, particularly in those areas with no expert dermatologists available. Clinicians have also generally reported affirmative experiences with teledermatology in the skin cancer field. Further studies focusing on cost effectiveness, patient outcomes, and patient and clinician satisfaction will facilitate to delineate the potential of teledermatology as a mean of prevention and diagnosis of nonmelanoma and melanoma skin cancer.