• P Carli, V De Giorgi, G Argenziano, D Palli, and B Giannotti.
• Department of Dermatology, University of Florence, Italy. CARLI@cesit1.unifi.it
• J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2002 Jul 1; 16 (4): 339-46.

BackgroundEpiluminescence microscopy (ELM) (dermoscopy, dermatoscopy) is a technique for non-invasive diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions that improves the diagnostic performance of dermatologists. Little is known about the possible influence of associated clinical features on the reliability of dermoscopic diagnosis during in vivo examination.ObjectiveTo compare diagnostic performance of in vivo dermoscopy (combined clinical and dermoscopic examination) with that of dermoscopy performed on photographic slides (pure dermoscopy).DesignThis case series comprised 256 pigmented skin lesions consecutively identified as suspicious or equivocal during examination in a general dermatological clinic. Clinical examination and in vivo dermoscopy were performed before excision by two trained dermatologists. The same observers carried out dermoscopy on photographic slides at a later time, and these three diagnostic classifications were reviewed together with the histological findings for the individual lesions. This was carried out in a university hospital.ResultsIn vivo dermoscopy performed better than dermoscopy on photographic slides for classification of pigmented skin lesions compared with histological diagnosis, and both performed better than general clinical diagnosis. In vivo dermoscopic diagnosis of melanoma showed 98.1% sensitivity, 95.5% specificity and 96.1% diagnostic accuracy while dermoscopic diagnosis of melanoma on photographic slides was less reliable with 81.5% sensitivity, 86.7% specificity and 85.2% diagnostic accuracy. In particular, diagnosis of melanoma based on photographic slides led to nine false negative cases (three in situ, six invasive; thickness ranges 0.2-1.5 mm).ConclusionsIn vivo dermoscopy, i.e. combined clinical and dermoscopic examination, is more reliable than dermoscopy on photographic slides. In clinical practice, therefore, in vivo dermoscopy cannot be considered independent from associated clinical characteristics of the lesions, which help the trained observer to reach a more precise classification. This may have implications on the reliability of ELM diagnosis made by an observer not fully trained in the clinical diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions or by a remote observer during digital ELM teleconsultation.

31 keywords...

hide…