ABSTRACT
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: Teledermatology is the use of communications technology to enable the remote evaluation of skin lesions. Dermatological complaints are common among pediatric patients and should be handled differently than adults. The aim of this study is to group the dermatological lesions of pediatric patients who visited a dermatology outpatient clinic and to investigate in which groups the teledermatology method is more effective. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study. Images of skin lesions, which were examined face-to-face in a dermatology outpatient clinic, were transmitted to another dermatologist via telecommunication. The diagnoses by the physician who examined patients face-to-face were compared with the diagnoses by the teledermatologist. Informed consent was obtained from the parents or legal representatives of all patients participating in this study. RESULTS: A total of 93 pediatric patients were evaluated. In our study, the diagnoses by a dermatologist who evaluated patients face-to-face and the diagnoses by a teledermatologist were in agreement with 74.2% of the time. There was 100% agreement between both dermatologists for the diagnosis of acne and scabies. The diagnosis for verruca was consistent with 91.7% of the time, and for atopic dermatitis, it was 72.7%. There was a 25% consistency between both dermatologists on the diagnosis of contact dermatitis. The diagnostic consistency between both physicians was 53% in the erythematous disease group, 89% in the papulopustular group, and 70% in the pigmented group. CONCLUSION: Teledermatology is a reliable diagnostic method that shortens the waiting time of patients and provides a quick consultation with a dermatologist. When using the teledermatology method, it is important to know which skin lesions or disease groups are more accurately diagnosed.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Background: Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria (CSU) is characterized by recurrent wheals and/or angioedema for longer than 6-weeks. Guidelines recommend Omalizumab (Oma) as first-line and Cyclosporine-A (Cs-A) as second-line treatment in antihistamine resistant CSU. This step-wise algorithm might be time-consuming and costly. Objective: To determine indicators of response to Oma or Cs-A in CSU patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from seven centers in Turkey; the inclusion criteria for patients were to receive both Oma and Cs-A treatment (not concurrently) at some point in time during their follow-up. Clinical and laboratory features were compared between groups. Results: Among 110 CSU patients; 47 (42.7%) were Oma-responders, 15 (13.6%) were Cs-A-responders, and 24 (21.8%) were both Oma and Cs-A responders and 24 (21.8%) were non-responders to either drug. High CRP levels were more frequent in Cs-A-responders (72.7% vs. 40.3%; p = 0.055). Oma-responders had higher baseline UCT (Urticaria Control Test) scores (6 vs. 4.5; p = 0.045). Responders to both drugs had less angioedema and higher baseline UCT scores compared to other groups (33.3% vs. 62.8%; p = 0.01 and 8 vs. 5; p = 0.017). Non-responders to both drugs had an increased frequency in the female gender and lower baseline UCT scores compared to other groups (87.5% vs. 61.6%; p = 0.017 and 5 vs. 7; p = 0.06). Study Limitations: Retrospective nature, limited number of patients, no control group, the lack of the basophil activation (BAT) or BHRA (basophil histamine release assay) tests. Conclusions: Baseline disease activity assessment, which considers the presence of angioedema and disease activity scores, gender, and CRP levels might be helpful to predict treatment outcomes in CSU patients and to choose the right treatment for each patient. Categorizing patients into particular endotypes could provide treatment optimization and increase treatment success. © 2022 Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. on behalf of Sociedade Brasileira de Dermatologia. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).