Meta-analysis of digital dermoscopy follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions: A study on behalf of the International Dermoscopy Society

Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Volumn 27, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 805-814

  Salerni, G ^a   Teran T ^a   Puig, S ^b,c   Malvehy, J ^b,c   Zalaudek, I ^d,e   Argenziano, G ^e   Kittler, H ^f  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE ROSARIO   (Argentina)

^b HOSPITAL CLÍNIC   (Spain)

^c CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIÓN BIOMÉDICA EN RED DE ENFERMEDADES RARAS CIBERER   (Spain)

^d MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

^e S MARIA NUOVA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^f Universitatsklinik fur Dermatologie   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; DIGITAL IMAGING; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; DYSPLASTIC NEVUS; EPILUMINESCENCE MICROSCOPY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MELANOCYTIC NEVUS; MELANOMA; META ANALYSIS; MICROSCOPE; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

DERMOSCOPY; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MELANOMA; SKIN NEOPLASMS; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL;

EID: 84879081132     PISSN: 09269959     EISSN: 14683083     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.12032     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Kopf AW, Welkovich B, Frankel RE, et al. Thickness of malignant melanoma: global analysis of related factors. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1987; 13: 345-320.
2. Bafounta ML, Beauchet A, Aegerter P, Saiag P,. Is dermoscopy (epiluminescence microscopy) useful for the diagnosis of melanoma? Results of a meta-analysis using techniques adapted to the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Arch Dermatol 2001; 137: 1343-1350.
3. Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M,. Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. Lancet Oncol 2002; 3: 159-165.
4. Vestergaard ME, Macaskill P, Holt PE, Menzies SW,. Dermoscopy compared with naked eye examination for the diagnosis of primary melanoma: a meta-analysis of studies performed in a clinical setting. Br J Dermatol 2008; 159: 669-676.
5. Puig S, Argenziano G, Zalaudek I, et al. Melanomas that failed dermoscopic detection: a combined clinicodermoscopic approach for not missing melanoma. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33: 1262-1273.
6. Stolz W, Schiffner R, Pillet L, et al. Improvement of monitoring of melanocytic skin lesions with the use of a computerized acquisition and surveillance unit with a skin surface microscopic television camera. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996; 35: 202-207.
7. Argenziano G, Mordente I, Ferrara G, et al. Dermoscopic monitoring of melanocytic skin lesions: clinical outcome and patient compliance vary according to follow-up protocols. Br J Dermatol 2008; 159: 331-336.
8. Bauer J, Blum A, Strohhäcker U, Garbe C,. Surveillance of patients at high risk for cutaneous malignant melanoma using digital dermoscopy. Br J Dermatol 2005; 152: 87-92.
9. Fuller SR, Bowen GM, Tanner B, et al. Digital dermoscopic monitoring of atypical nevi in patients at risk for melanoma. Dermatol Surg 2007; 33: 1198-1206. discussion 1205-6.
10. Haenssle HA, Korpas B, Hansen-Hagge C, et al. Selection of patients for long-term surveillance with digital dermoscopy by assessment of melanoma risk factors. Arch Dermatol 2010; 146: 257-264.
11. Haenssle HA, Korpas B, Hansen-Hagge C, et al. Seven-point checklist for dermatoscopy: performance during 10 years of prospective surveillance of patients at increased melanoma risk. J Am Acad Dermatol 2010; 62: 785-793.
12. Haenssle HA, Krueger U, Vente C, et al. Results from an observational trial: digital epiluminescence microscopy follow-up of atypical nevi increases the sensitivity and the chance of success of conventional dermoscopy in detecting melanoma. J Invest Dermatol 2006; 126: 980-985.
13. Haenssle HA, Vente C, Bertsch HP, et al. Results of a surveillance programme for patients at high risk of malignant melanoma using digital and conventional dermoscopy. Eur J Cancer Prev 2004; 13: 133-138.
14. Malvehy J, Puig S,. Follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions with digital total-body photography and digital dermoscopy: a two-step method. Clin Dermatol 2002; 20: 297-304.
15. Schiffner R, Schiffner-Rohe J, Landthaler M, Stolz W,. Long-term dermoscopic follow-up of melanocytic naevi: clinical outcome and patient compliance. Br J Dermatol 2003; 149: 79-86.
16. Robinson JK, Nickoloff BJ,. Digital epiluminescence microscopy monitoring of high-risk patients. Arch Dermatol 2004; 140: 49-56.
17. Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M,. Follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions with digital epiluminescence microscopy: patterns of modifications observed in early melanoma, atypical nevi, and common nevi. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 43: 467-476.
18. Salerni G, Carrera C, Lovatto L, et al. Benefits of total body photography and digital dermoscopy ("two-step method of digital follow-up") in the early diagnosis of melanoma in high-risk patients. J Am Acad Dermatol 2012; 67: e17-27.
19. Menzies SW, Gutenev A, Avramidis M, et al. Short-term digital surface microscopic monitoring of atypical or changing melanocytic lesions. Arch Dermatol 2001; 137: 1583-1589.
20. Altamura D, Avramidis M, Menzies SW,. Assessment of the optimal interval for and sensitivity of short-term sequential digital dermoscopy monitoring for the diagnosis of melanoma. Arch Dermatol 2008; 144: 502-506.
21. Rademaker M, Oakley A,. Digital monitoring by whole body photography and sequential digital dermoscopy detects thinner melanomas. J Prim Health Care 2010; 2: 268-272.
22. Altamura D, Zalaudek I, Sera F, et al. Dermoscopic changes in acral melanocytic nevi during digital follow-up. Arch Dermatol 2007; 143: 1372-1376.
23. Banky JP, Kelly JW, English DR, et al. Incidence of new and changed nevi and melanomas detected using baseline images and dermoscopy in patients at high risk for melanoma. Arch Dermatol 2005; 141: 998-1006.
24. Carli P, de Giorgi V, Chiarugi A, et al. Addition of dermoscopy to conventional naked-eye examination in melanoma screening: a randomized study. J Am Acad Dermatol 2004; 50: 683-689.
25. Carli P, Ghigliotti G, Gnone M, et al. Baseline factors influencing decisions on digital follow-up of melanocytic lesions in daily practice: an Italian multicenter survey. J Am Acad Dermatol 2006; 55: 256-262.
26. Carli P, Mannone F, De Giorgi V, et al. The problem of false-positive diagnosis in melanoma screening: the impact of dermoscopy. Melanoma Res 2003; 13: 179-182.
27. Kittler H, Guitera P, Riedl E, et al. Identification of clinically featureless incipient melanoma using sequential dermoscopy imaging. Arch Dermatol 2006; 142: 1113-1119.
28. Rubegni P, Cevenini G, Burroni M, et al. Objective follow-up of atypical melanocytic skin lesions: a retrospective study. Arch Dermatol Res 2010; 302: 551-560.
29. Seidenari S, Pellacani G, Martella A,. Acquired melanocytic lesions and the decision to excise: role of color variegation and distribution as assessed by dermoscopy. Dermatol Surg 2005; 31: 184-189.
30. Wang SQ, Kopf AW, Koenig K, et al. Detection of melanomas in patients followed up with total cutaneous examinations, total cutaneous photography, and dermoscopy. J Am Acad Dermatol 2004; 50: 15-20.
31. Wollina U, Burroni M, Torricelli R, et al. Digital dermoscopy in clinical practise: a three-centre analysis. Skin Res Technol 2007; 13: 133-142.
32. Vargas Sabadías Antonio,. Estadística Descriptiva e Inferencial. Colecciõn Ciencia y Tecnología. Ed. Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, 1995.
33. Breslow A,. Thickness, cross-sectional areas, and depth of invasion in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg 1970; 172: 902-908.
34. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. URL http://www.seer.cancer.gov (last accessed: 7 March 2012).
35. Criscione VD, Weinstock MA,. Melanoma thickness trends in the United States, 1988-2006. J Invest Dermatol 2010; 130: 793-797.
36. Garbe C, McLeod GR, Buettner PG,. Time trends of cutaneous melanoma in Queensland, Australia and Central Europe. Cancer 2000; 89: 1269-1278.
37. Murray CS, Stockton DL, Doherty VR,. Thick melanoma: the challenge persists. Br J Dermatol 2005; 152: 104-109.
38. Tejera-Vaquerizo A, Mendiola-Fernández M, Fernández-Orland A, Herrera-Ceballos E,. Thick melanoma: the problem continues. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2008; 22: 575-579.
39. Baade PD, Youl PH, Janda M, et al. Factors associated with the number of lesions excised for each skin cancer. Arch Dermatol 2008; 144: 1468-1476.
40. Hansen C, Wilkinson D, Hansen M, Argenziano G,. How good are skin cancer clinics at melanoma detection? Number needed to treat variability across a national clinic group in Australia. J Am Acad Dermatol 2009; 61: 599-604.
41. English DR, Burton RC, del Mar CB, et al. Evaluation of aid to diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions in general practice: controlled trial randomised by practice. Br J Dermatol 2003; 327: 1-6.
42. English DR, Del Mar C, Burton RC,. Factors influencing the number needed to excise: excision rates of pigmented lesions by general practitioners. Med J Aust 2004; 180: 16-19.
43. Marks R, Jolley D, McCormack C, Dorevitch AP,. Who removes pigmented skin lesions? J Am Acad Dermatol 1997; 36: 721-726.