Abigail Waldman

Isotretinoin and Timing of Procedural Interventions: A Systematic Review With Consensus Recommendations.

Importance The notion that systemic isotretinoin taken within 6 to 12 months of cutaneous surgery contributes to abnormal scarring or delayed wound healing is widely taught and practiced; however, it is based on 3 small case series from the mid-1980s. Objective To evaluate the body of literature to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the safety of procedural interventions performed either concurrently with, or immediately following the cessation of systemic isotretinoin therapy. Evidence Review A panel of national experts in pediatric dermatology, procedural/cosmetic dermatology, plastic surgery, scars, wound healing, acne, and isotretinoin was convened. A systematic PubMed review of English-language articles published from 1982 to 2017 was performed using the following search terms: isotretinoin, 13-cis-retinoic acid, Accutane, retinoids, acitretin, surgery, surgical, laser, ablative laser, nonablative laser, laser hair removal, chemical peel, dermabrasion, wound healing, safety, scarring, hypertrophic scar, and keloid. Evidence was graded, and expert consensus was obtained. Findings Thirty-two relevant publications reported 1485 procedures. There was insufficient evidence to support delaying manual dermabrasion, superficial chemical peels, cutaneous surgery, laser hair removal, and fractional ablative and nonablative laser procedures for patients currently receiving or having recently completed isotretinoin therapy. Based on the available literature, mechanical dermabrasion and fully ablative laser are not recommended in the setting of systemic isotretinoin treatment. Conclusions and Relevance Physicians and patients may have an evidence-based discussion regarding the known risk of cutaneous surgical procedures in the setting of systemic isotretinoin therapy. For some patients and some conditions, an informed decision may lead to earlier and potentially more effective interventions.

Asds Guidelines Task Force: Consensus Recommendations Regarding the Safety of Lasers, Dermabrasion, Chemical Peels, Energy Devices, and Skin Surgery During and After Isotretinoin Use

BACKGROUND Currently, the isotretinoin (13-cis-retinoic acid) package insert contains language advising the discontinuation of isotretinoin for 6 months before performing cosmetic procedures, including waxing, dermabrasion, chemical peels, laser procedures, or incisional and excisional cold-steel surgery. It is common practice to follow this standard because of concerns regarding reports of sporadic adverse events and increased risk of scarring. OBJECTIVE To develop expert consensus regarding the safety of skin procedures, including resurfacing, energy device treatments, and incisional and excisional procedures, in the setting of concurrent or recent isotretinoin use. MATERIALS AND METHODS The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery authorized a task force of content experts to review the evidence and provide guidance. First, data were extracted from the literature. This was followed by a clinical question review, a consensus Delphi process, and validation of the results by peer review. RESULTS The task force concluded that there is insufficient evidence to justify delaying treatment with superficial chemical peels and nonablative lasers, including hair removal lasers and lights, vascular lasers, and nonablative fractional devices for patients currently or recently exposed to isotretinoin. Superficial and focal dermabrasion may also be safe when performed by a well-trained clinician.

Practice and Educational Gaps in Cosmetic Dermatologic Surgery.

This article identifies gaps in the practice of cosmetic dermatology and cosmetics education, and how to overcome these limitations. There is a rapid development of new devices and procedures, with limited data, patient-reported outcomes, and comparative effectiveness research from which to develop best cosmetic practice. There is a need for increased research and funding dedicated to these goals, improved and convenient training for staff to adopt new devices/procedures, and continuous evolution of databases to pool outcome data and develop outcome sets. Resident education can be improved by dedicated resident cosmetic clinics, didactic teaching from visiting professors, attendance of cosmetic dermatology courses and meetings, and encouraging postresidency training.

Self-reported Patient Motivations for Seeking Cosmetic Procedures

Importance Despite the growing popularity of cosmetic procedures, the sociocultural and quality-of-life factors that motivate patients to undergo such procedures are not well understood. Objective To estimate the relative importance of factors that motivate patients to seek minimally invasive cosmetic procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective, multicenter observational study was performed at 2 academic and 11 private dermatology practice sites that represented all US geographic regions. Adult patients presenting for cosmetic consultation or treatment from December 4, 2016, through August 9, 2017, were eligible for participation. Exposures Participants completed a survey instrument based on a recently developed subjective framework of motivations and a demographic questionnaire. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were the self-reported most common motivations in each quality-of-life category. Secondary outcomes were other frequently reported motivations and those associated with specific procedures. Results Of 529 eligible patients, 511 agreed to participate, were enrolled, and completed the survey. Typical respondents were female (440 [86.1%]), 45 years or older (286 [56.0%]), white (386 [75.5%]), and college educated (469 [91.8%]) and had previously received at least 2 cosmetic procedures (270 [52.8%]). Apart from motivations pertaining to aesthetic appearance, including the desire for beautiful skin and a youthful, attractive appearance, motives related to physical health, such as preventing worsening of condition or symptoms (253 of 475 [53.3%]), and psychosocial well-being, such as the desire to feel happier and more confident or improve total quality of life (314 of 467 [67.2%]), treat oneself or celebrate (284 of 463 [61.3%]), and look good professionally (261 of 476 [54.8%]) were commonly reported. Motivations related to cost and convenience were rated as less important (68 of 483 [14.1%]). Most motivations were internally generated, designed to please the patients and not others, with patients making the decision to undergo cosmetic procedures themselves and spouses seldom being influential. Patients younger than 45 years were more likely to undertake procedures to prevent aging (54 of 212 [25.5%] vs 42 of 286 [14.7%] among patients ≥45 years; P < .001). Patients seeking certain procedures, such as body contouring (19 of 22 [86.4%]), acne scar treatment (36 of 42 [85.7%]), and tattoo removal (8 of 11 [72.7%]), were more likely to report psychological and emotional motivations. Conclusions and Relevance This initial prospective, multicenter study comprehensively assessed why patients seek minimally invasive cosmetic procedures. Common reasons included emotional, psychological, and practical motivations in addition to the desire to enhance physical appearance. Differences relative to patient age and procedures sought may need further exploration.

ASDS Cosmetic Dermatologic Surgery Fellowship Milestones

BACKGROUND The American Council of Graduate Medical Education, which oversees much of postgraduate medical education in the United States, has championed the concept of “milestones,” standard levels of achievement keyed to particular time points, to assess trainee performance during residency. OBJECTIVE To develop a milestones document for the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) Cosmetic Dermatologic Surgery (CDS) fellowship program. METHODS An ad hoc milestone drafting committee was convened that included members of the ASDS Accreditation Work Group and program directors of ASDS-approved Cosmetic Dermatologic Surgery (CDC) fellowship training programs. Draft milestones were circulated through email in multiple rounds until consensus was achieved. RESULTS Thirteen milestones were developed in the 6 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competency areas, with 8 of these being patient-care milestones. Additional instructions for milestone administration more specific to the CDS fellowship than general ACGME instructions were also approved. Implementation of semiannual milestones was scheduled for the fellowship class entering in July 2018. CONCLUSION Milestones are now available for CDS fellowship directors to implement in combination with other tools for fellow evaluation.

Practice and Educational Gaps in Light, Laser, and Energy Treatments

This article discusses current practice in laser dermatology, the gaps in practice, and recommendations for improvement. As is the case with other areas of cosmetic dermatology, there is a rapid development of new laser and light devices with limited epidemiologic data available to inform best practice. The high fixed cost associated with new laser devices, limited space available in some practices, and inconsistent training may limit the adoption of needed therapies. Improving research in this area; training opportunities for physicians, residents, and staff; and cost-effective laser/light device rentals programs could improve quality of current practice.

Practice and Educational Gaps in Surgery for Skin Cancer.

Surgery for skin cancer is a major part of clinical dermatology, and the largest single component of dermatologic surgery practice. In general, residency training in dermatology provides comprehensive training in the theory and practice of skin cancer surgery. Practicing dermatologists are similarly expert in this area, and frequently assist other medical and surgical services by managing and coordinating the care of patients with skin cancer. However, there are minor gaps in training and practice that bear scrutiny and are amenable to rectification. This article defines the current practice in surgical treatment of skin cancers by dermatologists, gaps in practice, and mechanisms to improve current surgical practice.