Short Term Monitoring

From dermoscopedia

0.00
(0 votes)

 Authored by: Florentia Dimitriou     ·  Scott Menzies

Annotations
Description This page has not yet been summarized.
Author(s) Florentia Dimitriou · Scott Menzies
Owner Scott Menzies→ send e-mail
Status released
Status update June 14, 2017
Status by Ralph P. Braun
User=

Short Term Monitoring

every three months or less

  • Is performed for lesions, that because of history of appearance, cannot be deemed benignThis glossary term has not yet been described. with absolute certainty at the initial examination.
  • It enables early detection of fearless melanomas while decreasing the need of excision of clinically suspicious benign lesions.
  • Any morphologic change seen at three months from baseline (short-term monitoring) requires excision.


Significant change Non-significant change
Any change other than non-significant changes Global change in pigmentation
Loss or appearance of milia-like cystsThis glossary term has not yet been described.

BenignThis glossary term has not yet been described. Lesions

  • Lesions remaining unchanged at 2-5-4.5 months are mostly confirmed benign on further follow-up.

Non-lentigo maligna type lesions

  • Lesions observed to change during the short-term interval of 2.5-4.5 months.

Lentigo maligna Lesions

  • The changes in lentigo maligna melanomaThis glossary term has not yet been described. can develop very gradually and thus a longer follow-up interval is necessary to detect some of these melanomas. A monitored interval between 6-12 months is recommended.




References

  1. An Atlas of DermoscopyDermoscopy is a non invasive diagnostic method., Second Edition. Marghoob A. et al. CRC Press; 2012.
  2. Altamura, D., Avramidis, M. & Menzies, S.W., 2008, Assessment of the optimal interval for and sensitivity of short-term sequential digital dermoscopyThis glossary term has not yet been described. moni- toring for the diagnosisThis glossary term has not yet been described. of melanomaThis glossary term has not yet been described.. Arch Dermatol, 144, 502–6.
  3. Altamura, D., Zalaudek, I., Sera, F., et al., 2007, Dermoscopic changes in acralAcral melanoma is a type of skin cancer that occurs on fingers, palms, soles, and nail beds. melanocyticThis glossary term has not yet been described. neviThis glossary term has not yet been described. during digital follow-up. Arch Dermatol, 143, 1372–6.
  4. Argenziano, G., Zalaudek, I. & Ferrara, G., 2007, Fast-growing and slow-growing melanomas. Arch Dermatol, 143, 802–3; author reply 803–4.
  5. Banky, J.P., Kelly, J.W., English, D.R., Yeatman, J.M. & Dowling, J.P., 2005, Incidence of new and changed nevi and melanomas detected using baseline images and dermoscopyDermoscopy is a non invasive diagnostic method. in patients at high risk for melanoma. Arch Dermatol, 141, 998–1006.
  6. Bauer, J., Blum, A., Strohhäcker, U. & Garbe, C., 2005, Surveillance of patients at high risk for cutaneous malignantThis glossary term has not yet been described. melanoma using digital dermoscopy. Br J Dermatol, 152, 87–92.
  7. Dawid, M., Pehamberger, H., Wolff, K., Binder, M. & Kittler, H., 2002, Evaluation of the ability of patients to identify enlarging melanocytic nevi. Arch Dermatol, 138, 984–5. Fuller, S.R., BowenThis glossary term has not yet been described., G.M., Tanner, B., Florell, S.R. & Grossman, D., 2007, Digital dermoscopic monitoring of atypical neviThis glossary term has not yet been described. in patients at risk for melanoma. Dermatol Surg, 33, 1198–206; discussion 1205–6.
  8. Haenssle, H.A., Krueger, U., Vente, C., et al., 2006, 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, 126, 980–5.
  9. Kittler, H. & Binder, M., 2001, Risks and benefits of sequential imaging of melanocytic skin lesions in patients with multiple atypical nevi. Arch Dermatol, 137, 1590–5.
  10. Kittler, H. & Binder, M., 2002, Follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions with digital dermoscopy: risks and benefits. Archives of Dermatology, 138, 1379.
  11. Kittler, H., Pehamberger, H., Wolff, K. & Binder, M., 2000a, 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, 43, 467–76.
  12. Kittler, H., Seltenheim, M., Dawid, M., et al., 2000b, Frequency and characteristics of enlarging common melanocytic nevi. Arch Dermatol, 136, 316–20.
  13. Menzies, S.W., Gutenev, A., Avramidis, M., Batrac, A. & McCarthy, W.H., 2001, Short-term digital surface microscopic monitoring of atypical or changing mela- nocytic lesions. Arch Dermatol, 137, 1583–9.
  14. Robinson, J. & Nickoloff, B., 2004, Digital epiluminescence microscopy monitoring of high-risk patients. Arch Dermatol, 140, 49–56.
  15. Zalaudek, I., Karin, S., Marghoob, A., et al., 2011, Frequency of dermoscopic nevus subtypes by ageprocess of becoming older and body siteThis glossary term has not yet been described.: a Cross-sectional Study. Arch Dermatol, 147, 663–70.