With the growing popularity of water sports and a proliferation of invasive species, human injuries from marine animal envenomation continue to rise.1-3 Members of the scorpionfish family Scorpaenidae are second only to stingrays as the leading cause of the 40,000 to 50,000 injuries annually from marine life worldwide.4 Because scorpionfish represent a growing threat and competition with native species, it has been suggested that they could replace endangered species on restaurant menus.5-8 Scorpionfish have been introduced by humans from tropical to temperate seas and are now common off the coast of California and the eastern coast from New York to Florida, as well as in the Caribbean, the Bahamas, and off the southern coast of Brazil. Victims of scorpionfish stings experience considerable pain and may require days to weeks to fully recover, highlighting the socioeconomic costs and burden of scorpionfish envenomation.9,10 Fishers, divers, swimmers, and aquarium owners are most often affected.
Family
The common term scorpionfish refers to both the family Scorpaenidae and the genus Scorpaena. Members of this family possess similar dorsal, anal, and pelvic fins, though they vary between genera in their size and the potency of the venom they insulate. Other familiar members include the genus Pterois (lionfish) and Synanceja (stonefish). Synanceja are the most venomous within the group, but scorpionfish stings more commonly arise from Pterois and Scorpaena.8Because of the rare shapes and vibrant colors of scorpionfish, some traders and aquarium owners will seek and pay high prices for these fish, providing further opportunity for envenomation.11,12
Characteristics
Scorpionfish have with a high variation in color, ranging from lighter grays to intense reds depending on their geographic location and habitat. Synanceja are bland in coloration, blending in with rocks and gravel, but the more dramatic-appearing Scorpaena exhibit a large cranium and wide range of multicolored patterns (Figure 1).13Pterois serve as the most conspicuous member of the group with brightly colored red and white stripes (Figure 2). Scorpionfish commonly grow up to 19 inches long and boast 12 dorsal, 2 pelvic, and 3 anal spines housing 5 to 10 mg of venom.14 An integumentary sheath encapsulates each spine housing the glandular tissue that produces the potent venom.
Photograph courtesy of Sylvain Le Bris (https://www.inaturalist.org/). Republished under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC 4.0).
FIGURE 1. Red scorpionfish (Scorpaena scrofa).
Toxin Properties
Unlike Pterois and Synanceja, Scorpaena do not have venom ducts around their glands, complicating the work of marine biologists aiming to extract and study the venomous toxins. Several studies have managed to isolate scorpionfish venom and overcome its unstable heat-labile nature to investigate its biologic properties.15-20 Several high-molecular-weight proteins (50–800 kDa) comprise the venom, including hyaluronidase, integrin-inhibiting factors, capillary permeability factor, proteases, and some less-understood cytolytic toxins. These factors provoke the inflammatory, proteolytic, hemorrhagic, cardiovascular, and hemolytic biologic activities at both the local and systemic levels, directing damage to wounded tissues and inducing vascular and tissue permeability to reach cellular processes far and wide. Mediators of inflammation include tumor necrosis factor, IL-6, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1, followed by neutrophils and other mononuclear cells, initiating the immune response at the wound site. Toxin potency remains for up to 2 days after fish death.1
Photograph courtesy of 808_Diver (https://www.inaturalist.org/). Republished under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC 4.0).
FIGURE 2. Lionfish (Pterois volitans).
Clinical Manifestation
Physicians may be guided by clinical symptoms in identifying scorpionfish stings, as the patient may not know the identity of their marine assailant. Initially, individuals punctured by scorpionfish spikes will experience an acute pain and burning sensation at the puncture site that may be accompanied by systemic symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, tachycardia, hypotension, loss of consciousness, difficulty breathing, and delirium.9,21-23 The pain will intensify and radiate distal to the site of envenomation, and the wound may exhibit vesiculation, erythema, bruising, pallor, and notable edema.4,24 Pain intensity peaks at 30 to 90 minutes after envenomation, and other systemic symptoms generally last for 24 to 48 hours.25 If patients do not seek prompt treatment, secondary infection may ensue, and the lingering venom in the blister may cause dermal necrosis, paresthesia, and anesthesia. Chronic sequelae may include joint contractures, compartment syndrome, necrotic ulcers, and chronic neuropathy.1
Management
Treatment of scorpionfish stings primarily is palliative and aimed at symptom reduction. Patients should immediately treat wounds with hot but not scalding water immersion.26,27 Given the thermolabile components of scorpionfish venom, the most effective treatment is to soak the affected limb in water 42 °C to 45 °C for 30 to 90 minutes. Any higher temperature may pose risk for scalding burns. Children should be monitored throughout treatment.28 If hot water immersion does not provide relief, oral analgesics may be considered. Stonefish antivenom is available and may be used for any scorpionfish sting given the shared biologic properties between genera. Providers evaluating stings could use sterile irrigation to clean wounds and search for foreign bodies including spine fragments; probing should be accomplished by instruments rather than a gloved finger. Providers should consider culturing wounds and prescribing antibiotics for suspected secondary infections. A tetanus toxoid history also should be elicited, and patients may have a booster administered, as indicated.29
References
Rensch G, Murphy-Lavoie HM. Lionfish, scorpionfish, and stonefish toxicity. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; May 10, 2022.
Cearnal L. Red lionfish and ciguatoxin: menace spreading through western hemisphere. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;60:21A-22A. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.05.022
Côté IM, Green SJ. Potential effects of climate change on a marine invasion: the importance of current context. Curr Zool. 2012;58:1-8. doi:10.1093/czoolo/58.1.1
Venomology of scorpionfishes. In: Santhanam R. Biology and Ecology of Venomous Marine Scorpionfishes. Academic Press; 2019:263-278.
Ferri J, Staglicˇic´ N, Matić-Skoko S. The black scorpionfish, Scorpaena porcus (Scorpaenidae): could it serve as reliable indicator of Mediterranean coastal communities’ health? Ecol Indicators. 2012;18:25-30. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.004
Santhanam R. Biology and Ecology of Venomous Marine Scorpionfishes. Academic Press; 2019.
Morris JA, Akins JL. Feeding ecology of invasive lionfish (Pterois volitans) in the Bahamian Archipelago. Environ Biol Fishes. 2009;86:389-398. doi:10.1007/s10641-009-9538-8
Albins MA, Hixon MA. Worst case scenario: potential long-term effects of invasive predatory lionfish (Pterois volitans) on Atlantic and Caribbean coral-reef communities. Environ Biol Fishes. 2013;96:1151–1157. doi:10.1007/s10641-011-9795-1
Haddad V Jr, Martins IA, Makyama HM. Injuries caused by scorpionfishes (Scorpaena plumieri Bloch, 1789 and Scorpaena brasiliensis Cuvier, 1829) in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean (Brazilian coast): epidemiologic, clinic and therapeutic aspects of 23 stings in humans. Toxicon. 2003;42:79-83. doi:10.1016/s0041-0101(03)00103-x
Campos FV, Menezes TN, Malacarne PF, et al. A review on the Scorpaena plumieri fish venom and its bioactive compounds. J Venom Anim Toxins Incl Trop Dis. 2016;22:35. doi:10.1186/s40409-016-0090-7
Needleman RK, Neylan IP, Erickson TB. Environmental and ecological effects of climate change on venomous marine and amphibious species in the wilderness. Wilderness Environ Med. 2018;29:343-356. doi:10.1016/j.wem.2018.04.003
Aldred B, Erickson T, Lipscomb J. Lionfish envenomations in an urban wilderness. Wilderness Environ Med. 1996;7:291-296. doi:10.1580/1080-6032(1996)007[0291:leiauw]2.3.co;2
Stewart J, Hughes JM. Life-history traits of the southern hemisphere eastern red scorpionfish, Scorpaena cardinalis (Scorpaenidae: Scorpaeninae). Mar Freshw Res. 2010;61:1290-1297. doi:10.1071/MF10040
Auerbach PS. Marine envenomations. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:486-493. doi:10.1056/NEJM199108153250707
Andrich F, Carnielli JB, Cassoli JS, et al. A potent vasoactive cytolysin isolated from Scorpaena plumieri scorpionfish venom. Toxicon. 2010;56:487-496. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2010.05.003
Gomes HL, Andrich F, Mauad H, et al. Cardiovascular effects of scorpionfish (Scorpaena plumieri) venom. Toxicon. 2010;55(2-3):580-589. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2009.10.012
Menezes TN, Carnielli JB, Gomes HL, et al. Local inflammatory response induced by scorpionfish Scorpaena plumieri venom in mice. Toxicon. 2012;60:4-11. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2012.03.008
Schaeffer RC Jr, Carlson RW, Russell FE. Some chemical properties of the venom of the scorpionfish Scorpaena guttata. Toxicon. 1971;9:69-78. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(71)90045-6
Khalil AM, Wahsha MA, Abu Khadra KM, et al. Biochemical and histopathological effects of the stonefish (Synanceia verrucosa) venom in rats. Toxicon. 2018;142:45-51. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2017.12.052
Mouchbahani-Constance S, Lesperance LS, Petitjean H, et al. Lionfish venom elicits pain predominantly through the activation of nonpeptidergic nociceptors. Pain. 2018;159:2255-2266. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001326
Ottuso P. Aquatic dermatology: encounters with the denizens of the deep (and not so deep)—a review. part II: the vertebrates, single-celled organisms, and aquatic biotoxins. Int J Dermatol. 2013;52:268-278. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.05426.x
Bayley HH. Injuries caused by scorpion fish. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1940;34:227-230. doi:10.1016/s0035-9203(40)90072-4
González D. Epidemiological and clinical aspects of certain venomous animals of Spain. Toxicon. 1982;20:925-928. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(82)90080-0
Halstead BW. Injurious effects from the sting of the scorpionfish, Scorpaena guttata. with report of a case. Calif Med. 1951;74:395-396.
Vasievich MP, Villarreal JD, Tomecki KJ. Got the travel bug? a review of common infections, infestations, bites, and stings among returning travelers. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2016;17:451-462. doi:10.1007/s40257-016-0203-7
Barnett S, Saggiomo S, Smout M, et al. Heat deactivation of the stonefish Synanceia horrida venom—implications for first-aid management. Diving Hyperb Med. 2017;47:155-158. doi:10.28920/dhm47.3.155-158
Russell FE. Weever fish sting: the last word. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983;287:981-982. doi:10.1136/bmj.287.6397.981-c
Shawn Afvari is from the New York Medical College School of Medicine, Valhalla. Dr. Elston is from the Department of Dermatology and Dermatologic Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Shawn Afvari is from the New York Medical College School of Medicine, Valhalla. Dr. Elston is from the Department of Dermatology and Dermatologic Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Shawn Afvari is from the New York Medical College School of Medicine, Valhalla. Dr. Elston is from the Department of Dermatology and Dermatologic Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
With the growing popularity of water sports and a proliferation of invasive species, human injuries from marine animal envenomation continue to rise.1-3 Members of the scorpionfish family Scorpaenidae are second only to stingrays as the leading cause of the 40,000 to 50,000 injuries annually from marine life worldwide.4 Because scorpionfish represent a growing threat and competition with native species, it has been suggested that they could replace endangered species on restaurant menus.5-8 Scorpionfish have been introduced by humans from tropical to temperate seas and are now common off the coast of California and the eastern coast from New York to Florida, as well as in the Caribbean, the Bahamas, and off the southern coast of Brazil. Victims of scorpionfish stings experience considerable pain and may require days to weeks to fully recover, highlighting the socioeconomic costs and burden of scorpionfish envenomation.9,10 Fishers, divers, swimmers, and aquarium owners are most often affected.
Family
The common term scorpionfish refers to both the family Scorpaenidae and the genus Scorpaena. Members of this family possess similar dorsal, anal, and pelvic fins, though they vary between genera in their size and the potency of the venom they insulate. Other familiar members include the genus Pterois (lionfish) and Synanceja (stonefish). Synanceja are the most venomous within the group, but scorpionfish stings more commonly arise from Pterois and Scorpaena.8Because of the rare shapes and vibrant colors of scorpionfish, some traders and aquarium owners will seek and pay high prices for these fish, providing further opportunity for envenomation.11,12
Characteristics
Scorpionfish have with a high variation in color, ranging from lighter grays to intense reds depending on their geographic location and habitat. Synanceja are bland in coloration, blending in with rocks and gravel, but the more dramatic-appearing Scorpaena exhibit a large cranium and wide range of multicolored patterns (Figure 1).13Pterois serve as the most conspicuous member of the group with brightly colored red and white stripes (Figure 2). Scorpionfish commonly grow up to 19 inches long and boast 12 dorsal, 2 pelvic, and 3 anal spines housing 5 to 10 mg of venom.14 An integumentary sheath encapsulates each spine housing the glandular tissue that produces the potent venom.
Photograph courtesy of Sylvain Le Bris (https://www.inaturalist.org/). Republished under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC 4.0).
FIGURE 1. Red scorpionfish (Scorpaena scrofa).
Toxin Properties
Unlike Pterois and Synanceja, Scorpaena do not have venom ducts around their glands, complicating the work of marine biologists aiming to extract and study the venomous toxins. Several studies have managed to isolate scorpionfish venom and overcome its unstable heat-labile nature to investigate its biologic properties.15-20 Several high-molecular-weight proteins (50–800 kDa) comprise the venom, including hyaluronidase, integrin-inhibiting factors, capillary permeability factor, proteases, and some less-understood cytolytic toxins. These factors provoke the inflammatory, proteolytic, hemorrhagic, cardiovascular, and hemolytic biologic activities at both the local and systemic levels, directing damage to wounded tissues and inducing vascular and tissue permeability to reach cellular processes far and wide. Mediators of inflammation include tumor necrosis factor, IL-6, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1, followed by neutrophils and other mononuclear cells, initiating the immune response at the wound site. Toxin potency remains for up to 2 days after fish death.1
Photograph courtesy of 808_Diver (https://www.inaturalist.org/). Republished under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC 4.0).
FIGURE 2. Lionfish (Pterois volitans).
Clinical Manifestation
Physicians may be guided by clinical symptoms in identifying scorpionfish stings, as the patient may not know the identity of their marine assailant. Initially, individuals punctured by scorpionfish spikes will experience an acute pain and burning sensation at the puncture site that may be accompanied by systemic symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, tachycardia, hypotension, loss of consciousness, difficulty breathing, and delirium.9,21-23 The pain will intensify and radiate distal to the site of envenomation, and the wound may exhibit vesiculation, erythema, bruising, pallor, and notable edema.4,24 Pain intensity peaks at 30 to 90 minutes after envenomation, and other systemic symptoms generally last for 24 to 48 hours.25 If patients do not seek prompt treatment, secondary infection may ensue, and the lingering venom in the blister may cause dermal necrosis, paresthesia, and anesthesia. Chronic sequelae may include joint contractures, compartment syndrome, necrotic ulcers, and chronic neuropathy.1
Management
Treatment of scorpionfish stings primarily is palliative and aimed at symptom reduction. Patients should immediately treat wounds with hot but not scalding water immersion.26,27 Given the thermolabile components of scorpionfish venom, the most effective treatment is to soak the affected limb in water 42 °C to 45 °C for 30 to 90 minutes. Any higher temperature may pose risk for scalding burns. Children should be monitored throughout treatment.28 If hot water immersion does not provide relief, oral analgesics may be considered. Stonefish antivenom is available and may be used for any scorpionfish sting given the shared biologic properties between genera. Providers evaluating stings could use sterile irrigation to clean wounds and search for foreign bodies including spine fragments; probing should be accomplished by instruments rather than a gloved finger. Providers should consider culturing wounds and prescribing antibiotics for suspected secondary infections. A tetanus toxoid history also should be elicited, and patients may have a booster administered, as indicated.29
With the growing popularity of water sports and a proliferation of invasive species, human injuries from marine animal envenomation continue to rise.1-3 Members of the scorpionfish family Scorpaenidae are second only to stingrays as the leading cause of the 40,000 to 50,000 injuries annually from marine life worldwide.4 Because scorpionfish represent a growing threat and competition with native species, it has been suggested that they could replace endangered species on restaurant menus.5-8 Scorpionfish have been introduced by humans from tropical to temperate seas and are now common off the coast of California and the eastern coast from New York to Florida, as well as in the Caribbean, the Bahamas, and off the southern coast of Brazil. Victims of scorpionfish stings experience considerable pain and may require days to weeks to fully recover, highlighting the socioeconomic costs and burden of scorpionfish envenomation.9,10 Fishers, divers, swimmers, and aquarium owners are most often affected.
Family
The common term scorpionfish refers to both the family Scorpaenidae and the genus Scorpaena. Members of this family possess similar dorsal, anal, and pelvic fins, though they vary between genera in their size and the potency of the venom they insulate. Other familiar members include the genus Pterois (lionfish) and Synanceja (stonefish). Synanceja are the most venomous within the group, but scorpionfish stings more commonly arise from Pterois and Scorpaena.8Because of the rare shapes and vibrant colors of scorpionfish, some traders and aquarium owners will seek and pay high prices for these fish, providing further opportunity for envenomation.11,12
Characteristics
Scorpionfish have with a high variation in color, ranging from lighter grays to intense reds depending on their geographic location and habitat. Synanceja are bland in coloration, blending in with rocks and gravel, but the more dramatic-appearing Scorpaena exhibit a large cranium and wide range of multicolored patterns (Figure 1).13Pterois serve as the most conspicuous member of the group with brightly colored red and white stripes (Figure 2). Scorpionfish commonly grow up to 19 inches long and boast 12 dorsal, 2 pelvic, and 3 anal spines housing 5 to 10 mg of venom.14 An integumentary sheath encapsulates each spine housing the glandular tissue that produces the potent venom.
Photograph courtesy of Sylvain Le Bris (https://www.inaturalist.org/). Republished under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC 4.0).
FIGURE 1. Red scorpionfish (Scorpaena scrofa).
Toxin Properties
Unlike Pterois and Synanceja, Scorpaena do not have venom ducts around their glands, complicating the work of marine biologists aiming to extract and study the venomous toxins. Several studies have managed to isolate scorpionfish venom and overcome its unstable heat-labile nature to investigate its biologic properties.15-20 Several high-molecular-weight proteins (50–800 kDa) comprise the venom, including hyaluronidase, integrin-inhibiting factors, capillary permeability factor, proteases, and some less-understood cytolytic toxins. These factors provoke the inflammatory, proteolytic, hemorrhagic, cardiovascular, and hemolytic biologic activities at both the local and systemic levels, directing damage to wounded tissues and inducing vascular and tissue permeability to reach cellular processes far and wide. Mediators of inflammation include tumor necrosis factor, IL-6, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1, followed by neutrophils and other mononuclear cells, initiating the immune response at the wound site. Toxin potency remains for up to 2 days after fish death.1
Photograph courtesy of 808_Diver (https://www.inaturalist.org/). Republished under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC 4.0).
FIGURE 2. Lionfish (Pterois volitans).
Clinical Manifestation
Physicians may be guided by clinical symptoms in identifying scorpionfish stings, as the patient may not know the identity of their marine assailant. Initially, individuals punctured by scorpionfish spikes will experience an acute pain and burning sensation at the puncture site that may be accompanied by systemic symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, tachycardia, hypotension, loss of consciousness, difficulty breathing, and delirium.9,21-23 The pain will intensify and radiate distal to the site of envenomation, and the wound may exhibit vesiculation, erythema, bruising, pallor, and notable edema.4,24 Pain intensity peaks at 30 to 90 minutes after envenomation, and other systemic symptoms generally last for 24 to 48 hours.25 If patients do not seek prompt treatment, secondary infection may ensue, and the lingering venom in the blister may cause dermal necrosis, paresthesia, and anesthesia. Chronic sequelae may include joint contractures, compartment syndrome, necrotic ulcers, and chronic neuropathy.1
Management
Treatment of scorpionfish stings primarily is palliative and aimed at symptom reduction. Patients should immediately treat wounds with hot but not scalding water immersion.26,27 Given the thermolabile components of scorpionfish venom, the most effective treatment is to soak the affected limb in water 42 °C to 45 °C for 30 to 90 minutes. Any higher temperature may pose risk for scalding burns. Children should be monitored throughout treatment.28 If hot water immersion does not provide relief, oral analgesics may be considered. Stonefish antivenom is available and may be used for any scorpionfish sting given the shared biologic properties between genera. Providers evaluating stings could use sterile irrigation to clean wounds and search for foreign bodies including spine fragments; probing should be accomplished by instruments rather than a gloved finger. Providers should consider culturing wounds and prescribing antibiotics for suspected secondary infections. A tetanus toxoid history also should be elicited, and patients may have a booster administered, as indicated.29
References
Rensch G, Murphy-Lavoie HM. Lionfish, scorpionfish, and stonefish toxicity. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; May 10, 2022.
Cearnal L. Red lionfish and ciguatoxin: menace spreading through western hemisphere. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;60:21A-22A. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.05.022
Côté IM, Green SJ. Potential effects of climate change on a marine invasion: the importance of current context. Curr Zool. 2012;58:1-8. doi:10.1093/czoolo/58.1.1
Venomology of scorpionfishes. In: Santhanam R. Biology and Ecology of Venomous Marine Scorpionfishes. Academic Press; 2019:263-278.
Ferri J, Staglicˇic´ N, Matić-Skoko S. The black scorpionfish, Scorpaena porcus (Scorpaenidae): could it serve as reliable indicator of Mediterranean coastal communities’ health? Ecol Indicators. 2012;18:25-30. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.004
Santhanam R. Biology and Ecology of Venomous Marine Scorpionfishes. Academic Press; 2019.
Morris JA, Akins JL. Feeding ecology of invasive lionfish (Pterois volitans) in the Bahamian Archipelago. Environ Biol Fishes. 2009;86:389-398. doi:10.1007/s10641-009-9538-8
Albins MA, Hixon MA. Worst case scenario: potential long-term effects of invasive predatory lionfish (Pterois volitans) on Atlantic and Caribbean coral-reef communities. Environ Biol Fishes. 2013;96:1151–1157. doi:10.1007/s10641-011-9795-1
Haddad V Jr, Martins IA, Makyama HM. Injuries caused by scorpionfishes (Scorpaena plumieri Bloch, 1789 and Scorpaena brasiliensis Cuvier, 1829) in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean (Brazilian coast): epidemiologic, clinic and therapeutic aspects of 23 stings in humans. Toxicon. 2003;42:79-83. doi:10.1016/s0041-0101(03)00103-x
Campos FV, Menezes TN, Malacarne PF, et al. A review on the Scorpaena plumieri fish venom and its bioactive compounds. J Venom Anim Toxins Incl Trop Dis. 2016;22:35. doi:10.1186/s40409-016-0090-7
Needleman RK, Neylan IP, Erickson TB. Environmental and ecological effects of climate change on venomous marine and amphibious species in the wilderness. Wilderness Environ Med. 2018;29:343-356. doi:10.1016/j.wem.2018.04.003
Aldred B, Erickson T, Lipscomb J. Lionfish envenomations in an urban wilderness. Wilderness Environ Med. 1996;7:291-296. doi:10.1580/1080-6032(1996)007[0291:leiauw]2.3.co;2
Stewart J, Hughes JM. Life-history traits of the southern hemisphere eastern red scorpionfish, Scorpaena cardinalis (Scorpaenidae: Scorpaeninae). Mar Freshw Res. 2010;61:1290-1297. doi:10.1071/MF10040
Auerbach PS. Marine envenomations. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:486-493. doi:10.1056/NEJM199108153250707
Andrich F, Carnielli JB, Cassoli JS, et al. A potent vasoactive cytolysin isolated from Scorpaena plumieri scorpionfish venom. Toxicon. 2010;56:487-496. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2010.05.003
Gomes HL, Andrich F, Mauad H, et al. Cardiovascular effects of scorpionfish (Scorpaena plumieri) venom. Toxicon. 2010;55(2-3):580-589. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2009.10.012
Menezes TN, Carnielli JB, Gomes HL, et al. Local inflammatory response induced by scorpionfish Scorpaena plumieri venom in mice. Toxicon. 2012;60:4-11. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2012.03.008
Schaeffer RC Jr, Carlson RW, Russell FE. Some chemical properties of the venom of the scorpionfish Scorpaena guttata. Toxicon. 1971;9:69-78. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(71)90045-6
Khalil AM, Wahsha MA, Abu Khadra KM, et al. Biochemical and histopathological effects of the stonefish (Synanceia verrucosa) venom in rats. Toxicon. 2018;142:45-51. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2017.12.052
Mouchbahani-Constance S, Lesperance LS, Petitjean H, et al. Lionfish venom elicits pain predominantly through the activation of nonpeptidergic nociceptors. Pain. 2018;159:2255-2266. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001326
Ottuso P. Aquatic dermatology: encounters with the denizens of the deep (and not so deep)—a review. part II: the vertebrates, single-celled organisms, and aquatic biotoxins. Int J Dermatol. 2013;52:268-278. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.05426.x
Bayley HH. Injuries caused by scorpion fish. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1940;34:227-230. doi:10.1016/s0035-9203(40)90072-4
González D. Epidemiological and clinical aspects of certain venomous animals of Spain. Toxicon. 1982;20:925-928. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(82)90080-0
Halstead BW. Injurious effects from the sting of the scorpionfish, Scorpaena guttata. with report of a case. Calif Med. 1951;74:395-396.
Vasievich MP, Villarreal JD, Tomecki KJ. Got the travel bug? a review of common infections, infestations, bites, and stings among returning travelers. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2016;17:451-462. doi:10.1007/s40257-016-0203-7
Barnett S, Saggiomo S, Smout M, et al. Heat deactivation of the stonefish Synanceia horrida venom—implications for first-aid management. Diving Hyperb Med. 2017;47:155-158. doi:10.28920/dhm47.3.155-158
Russell FE. Weever fish sting: the last word. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983;287:981-982. doi:10.1136/bmj.287.6397.981-c
Hornbeak KB, Auerbach PS. Marine envenomation. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2017;35:321-337. doi:10.1016/j.emc.2016.12.004
References
Rensch G, Murphy-Lavoie HM. Lionfish, scorpionfish, and stonefish toxicity. StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; May 10, 2022.
Cearnal L. Red lionfish and ciguatoxin: menace spreading through western hemisphere. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;60:21A-22A. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.05.022
Côté IM, Green SJ. Potential effects of climate change on a marine invasion: the importance of current context. Curr Zool. 2012;58:1-8. doi:10.1093/czoolo/58.1.1
Venomology of scorpionfishes. In: Santhanam R. Biology and Ecology of Venomous Marine Scorpionfishes. Academic Press; 2019:263-278.
Ferri J, Staglicˇic´ N, Matić-Skoko S. The black scorpionfish, Scorpaena porcus (Scorpaenidae): could it serve as reliable indicator of Mediterranean coastal communities’ health? Ecol Indicators. 2012;18:25-30. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.11.004
Santhanam R. Biology and Ecology of Venomous Marine Scorpionfishes. Academic Press; 2019.
Morris JA, Akins JL. Feeding ecology of invasive lionfish (Pterois volitans) in the Bahamian Archipelago. Environ Biol Fishes. 2009;86:389-398. doi:10.1007/s10641-009-9538-8
Albins MA, Hixon MA. Worst case scenario: potential long-term effects of invasive predatory lionfish (Pterois volitans) on Atlantic and Caribbean coral-reef communities. Environ Biol Fishes. 2013;96:1151–1157. doi:10.1007/s10641-011-9795-1
Haddad V Jr, Martins IA, Makyama HM. Injuries caused by scorpionfishes (Scorpaena plumieri Bloch, 1789 and Scorpaena brasiliensis Cuvier, 1829) in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean (Brazilian coast): epidemiologic, clinic and therapeutic aspects of 23 stings in humans. Toxicon. 2003;42:79-83. doi:10.1016/s0041-0101(03)00103-x
Campos FV, Menezes TN, Malacarne PF, et al. A review on the Scorpaena plumieri fish venom and its bioactive compounds. J Venom Anim Toxins Incl Trop Dis. 2016;22:35. doi:10.1186/s40409-016-0090-7
Needleman RK, Neylan IP, Erickson TB. Environmental and ecological effects of climate change on venomous marine and amphibious species in the wilderness. Wilderness Environ Med. 2018;29:343-356. doi:10.1016/j.wem.2018.04.003
Aldred B, Erickson T, Lipscomb J. Lionfish envenomations in an urban wilderness. Wilderness Environ Med. 1996;7:291-296. doi:10.1580/1080-6032(1996)007[0291:leiauw]2.3.co;2
Stewart J, Hughes JM. Life-history traits of the southern hemisphere eastern red scorpionfish, Scorpaena cardinalis (Scorpaenidae: Scorpaeninae). Mar Freshw Res. 2010;61:1290-1297. doi:10.1071/MF10040
Auerbach PS. Marine envenomations. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:486-493. doi:10.1056/NEJM199108153250707
Andrich F, Carnielli JB, Cassoli JS, et al. A potent vasoactive cytolysin isolated from Scorpaena plumieri scorpionfish venom. Toxicon. 2010;56:487-496. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2010.05.003
Gomes HL, Andrich F, Mauad H, et al. Cardiovascular effects of scorpionfish (Scorpaena plumieri) venom. Toxicon. 2010;55(2-3):580-589. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2009.10.012
Menezes TN, Carnielli JB, Gomes HL, et al. Local inflammatory response induced by scorpionfish Scorpaena plumieri venom in mice. Toxicon. 2012;60:4-11. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2012.03.008
Schaeffer RC Jr, Carlson RW, Russell FE. Some chemical properties of the venom of the scorpionfish Scorpaena guttata. Toxicon. 1971;9:69-78. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(71)90045-6
Khalil AM, Wahsha MA, Abu Khadra KM, et al. Biochemical and histopathological effects of the stonefish (Synanceia verrucosa) venom in rats. Toxicon. 2018;142:45-51. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2017.12.052
Mouchbahani-Constance S, Lesperance LS, Petitjean H, et al. Lionfish venom elicits pain predominantly through the activation of nonpeptidergic nociceptors. Pain. 2018;159:2255-2266. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001326
Ottuso P. Aquatic dermatology: encounters with the denizens of the deep (and not so deep)—a review. part II: the vertebrates, single-celled organisms, and aquatic biotoxins. Int J Dermatol. 2013;52:268-278. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.05426.x
Bayley HH. Injuries caused by scorpion fish. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1940;34:227-230. doi:10.1016/s0035-9203(40)90072-4
González D. Epidemiological and clinical aspects of certain venomous animals of Spain. Toxicon. 1982;20:925-928. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(82)90080-0
Halstead BW. Injurious effects from the sting of the scorpionfish, Scorpaena guttata. with report of a case. Calif Med. 1951;74:395-396.
Vasievich MP, Villarreal JD, Tomecki KJ. Got the travel bug? a review of common infections, infestations, bites, and stings among returning travelers. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2016;17:451-462. doi:10.1007/s40257-016-0203-7
Barnett S, Saggiomo S, Smout M, et al. Heat deactivation of the stonefish Synanceia horrida venom—implications for first-aid management. Diving Hyperb Med. 2017;47:155-158. doi:10.28920/dhm47.3.155-158
Russell FE. Weever fish sting: the last word. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1983;287:981-982. doi:10.1136/bmj.287.6397.981-c
As some species of scorpionfish proliferate, providers may see an increase in envenomation cases.
Physicians should suspect scorpionfish stings based on clinical symptoms and physical examination.
Scorpionfish toxins are thermolabile, and patients can find symptom relief by immediately immersing the affected area in hot water (42 °C–45 °C) for 30 to 90 minutes.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Consolidated Pubs: Do Not Show Source Publication Logo
Restoring skin integrity and balance after injury is vital for survival, serving as a crucial defense mechanism against potential infections by preventing the entry of harmful pathogens. Moreover, proper healing is essential for restoring normal tissue function, allowing damaged tissues to repair and, in an ideal scenario, regenerate. Timely healing helps reduce the risk for complications, such as chronic wounds, which could lead to more severe issues if left untreated. Additionally, pain relief often is associated with effective wound healing as inflammatory responses diminish during the repair process.
The immune system plays a pivotal role in wound healing, influencing various repair mechanisms and ultimately determining the extent of scarring. Although inflammation is present throughout the repair response, recent studies have challenged the conventional belief of an inverse correlation between the intensity of inflammation and regenerative capacity. Inflammatory signals were found to be crucial for timely repair and fundamental processes in regeneration, possibly presenting a paradigm shift in the understanding of immunology.1-4 The complexities of wound healing are exemplified when evaluating and treating postamputation wounds. To address such a task, one needs a firm understanding of the science behind healing wounds and what can go wrong along the way.
Phases of Wound Healing
Wound healing is a complex process that involves a series of sequential yet overlapping phases, including hemostasis/inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling.
Hemostasis/Inflammation—The initial stage of wound healing involves hemostasis, in which the primary objective is to prevent blood loss and initiate inflammation. Platelets arrive at the wound site, forming a provisional clot that is crucial for subsequent healing phases.4-6 Platelets halt bleeding as well as act as a medium for cell migration and adhesion; they also are a source of growth factors and proinflammatory cytokines that herald the inflammatory response.4-7
Inflammation is characterized by the infiltration of immune cells, particularly neutrophils and macrophages. Neutrophils act as the first line of defense, clearing debris and preventing infection. Macrophages follow, phagocytizing apoptotic cells and releasing growth factors such as tumor necrosis factor α, vascular endothelial growth factor, and matrix metalloprotease 9, which stimulate the next phase.4-6,8 Typically, the hemostasis and inflammatory phase starts approximately 6 to 8 hours after wound origin and lasts 3 to 4 days.4,6,7
Proliferation—Following hemostasis and inflammation, the wound transitions into the proliferation phase, which is marked by the development of granulation tissue—a dynamic amalgamation of fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and inflammatory cells.1,4-8 Fibroblasts play a central role in synthesizing collagen, the primary structural protein in connective tissue. They also orchestrate synthesis of vitronectin, fibronectin, fibrin, and tenascin.4-6,8 Simultaneously, angiogenesis takes place, involving the creation of new blood vessels to supply essential nutrients and oxygen to the healing tissue.4,7,9 Growth factors such as transforming growth factor β and vascular endothelial growth factor coordinate cellular activities and foster tissue repair.4-6,8 The proliferation phase extends over days to weeks, laying the groundwork for subsequent tissue restructuring.
Remodeling—The final stage of wound healing is remodeling, an extended process that may persist for several months or, in some cases, years. Throughout this phase, the initially deposited collagen, predominantly type III collagen, undergoes transformation into mature type I collagen.4-6,8 This transformation is critical for reinstating the tissue’s strength and functionality. The balance between collagen synthesis and degradation is delicate, regulated by matrix metalloproteinases and inhibitors of metalloproteinases.4-8 Fibroblasts, myofibroblasts, and other cells coordinate this intricate process of tissue reorganization.4-7
The eventual outcome of the remodeling phase determines the appearance and functionality of the healed tissue. Any disruption in this phase can lead to complications, such as chronic wounds and hypertrophic scars/keloids.4-6 These abnormal healing processes are characterized by localized inflammation, heightened fibroblast function, and excessive accumulation of the extracellular matrix.4-8
Molecular Mechanisms
Comprehensive investigations—both in vivo and in vitro—have explored the intricate molecular mechanisms involved in heightened wound healing. Transforming growth factor β takes center stage as a crucial factor, prompting the transformation of fibroblasts into myofibroblasts and contributing to the deposition of extracellular matrix.2,4-8,10 Transforming growth factor β activates non-Smad signaling pathways, such as MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinase) and PI3K (phosphoinositide 3-kinase), influencing processes associated with fibrosis.5,11 Furthermore, microRNAs play a pivotal role in posttranscriptional regulation, influencing both transforming growth factor β signaling and fibroblast behavior.12-16
The involvement of prostaglandins is crucial in wound healing. Prostaglandin E2 plays a notable role and is positively correlated with the rate of wound healing.5 The cyclooxygenase pathway, pivotal for prostaglandin synthesis, becomes a target for inflammation control.4,5,10 Although aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs commonly are employed, their impact on wound healing remains controversial, as inhibition of cyclooxygenase may disrupt normal repair processes.5,17,18
Wound healing exhibits variations depending on age. Fetal skin regeneration is marked by the restoration of normal dermal architecture, including adnexal structures, nerves, vessels, and muscle.4-6 The distinctive characteristics of fetal wound healing include a unique profile of growth factors, a diminished inflammatory response, reduced biomechanical stress, and a distinct extracellular matrix composition.19 These factors contribute to a lower propensity for scar formation compared to the healing processes observed in adults. Fetal and adult wound healing differ fundamentally in their extracellular matrix composition, inflammatory cells, and cytokine levels.4-6,19 Adult wounds feature myofibroblasts, which are absent in fetal wounds, contributing to heightened mechanical tension.5 Delving deeper into the biochemical basis of fetal wound healing holds promise for mitigating scar formation in adults.
Takeaways From Other Species
Much of the biochemical knowledge of wound healing, especially regenerative wound healing, is known from other species. Geckos provide a unique model for studying regenerative repair in tails and nonregenerative healing in limbs after amputation. Scar-free wound healing is characterized by rapid wound closure, delayed blood vessel development, and collagen deposition, which contrasts with the hypervascular granulation tissue seen in scarring wounds.20 Scar-free wound healing and regeneration are intrinsic properties of the lizard tail and are unaffected by the location or method of detachment.21
Compared to amphibians with extraordinary regenerative capacity, data suggest the lack of regenerative capacity in mammals may come from a desynchronization of the fine-tuned interplay of progenitor cells such as blastema and differentiated cells.22,23 In mice, the response to amputation is specific to the level: cutting through the distal third of the terminal phalanx elicits a regeneration response, yielding a new digit tip resembling the lost one, while an amputation through the distal third of the intermediate phalanx triggers a wound healing and scarring response.24
Wound Healing Following Limb Amputation
Limb amputation represents a profound change in an individual’s life, impacting daily activities and overall well-being. There are many causes of amputation, but the most common include cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, cancer, and trauma.25-27 Trauma represents a relatively common cause within the US Military due to the overall young population as well as inherent risks of uniformed service.25,27 Advances in protective gear and combat casualty care have led to an increased number of individuals surviving with extremity injuries requiring amputation, particularly among younger service members, with a subgroup experiencing multiple amputations.27-29
Numerous factors play a crucial role in the healing and function of postamputation wounds. The level of amputation is a key determinant influencing both functional outcomes and the healing process. Achieving a balance between preserving function and removing damaged tissue is essential. A study investigating cardiac function and oxygen consumption in 25 patients with peripheral vascular disease found higher-level amputations resulted in decreased walking speed and cadence, along with increased oxygen consumption per meter walked.30
Selecting the appropriate amputation level is vital to optimize functional outcomes without compromising wound healing. Successful prosthetic limb fitting depends largely on the length of the residual stump to support the body load and suspend the prosthesis. For long bone amputations, maintaining at least 12-cm clearance above the knee joint in transfemoral amputees and 10-cm below the knee joint in transtibial amputees is critical for maximizing functional outcomes.31
Surgical technique also is paramount. The goal is to minimize the risk for pressure ulcers by avoiding bony spurs and muscle imbalances. Shaping the muscle and residual limb is essential for proper prosthesis fitting. Attention to neurovascular structures, such as burying nerve ends to prevent neuropathic pain during prosthesis wear, is crucial.32 In extremity amputations, surgeons often resort to free flap transfer techniques for stump reconstruction. In a study of 31 patients with severe lower extremity injuries undergoing various amputations, the use of latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flaps, alone or in combination with serratus anterior muscle flaps, resulted in fewer instances of deep ulceration and allowed for earlier prosthesis wear.33
Addressing Barriers to Wound Healing
Multiple barriers to successful wound healing are encountered in the amputee population. Amputations from trauma have a less-controlled initiation, which carries with it a higher risk for infection, poor wound healing, and other complications.
Infection—Infection often is one of the first hurdles encountered in postamputation wound healing. Critical first steps in infection prevention include thorough cleaning of soiled traumatic wounds and appropriate tissue debridement coupled with scrupulous sterile technique and postoperative monitoring for signs and symptoms of infection.
In a retrospective study of 223 combat-related major lower extremity amputations (initial and revision) between 2009 and 2015, the use of intrawound antibiotic powder at the time of closure demonstrated a 13% absolute risk reduction in deep infection rates, which was particularly notable in revision amputations, with a number needed to treat of 8 for initial amputations and 4 for revision amputations on previously infected limbs.34 Intra-operative antibiotic powder may represent a cheap and easy consideration for this special population of amputees. Postamputation antibiotic prophylaxis for infection prevention is an area of controversy. For nontraumatic infections, data suggest antibiotic prophylaxis may not decrease infection rates in these patients.35,36
Interestingly, a study by Azarbal et al37 aimed to investigate the correlation between nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization and other patient factors with wound occurrence following major lower extremity amputation. The study found MRSA colonization was associated with higher rates of overall wound occurrence as well as wound occurrence due to wound infection. These data suggest nasal MRSA eradication may improve postoperative wound outcomes after major lower extremity amputation.37
Dressing Choice—The dressing chosen for a residual limb also is of paramount importance following amputation. The personalized and dynamic management of postamputation wounds and skin involves achieving optimal healing through a dressing that sustains appropriate moisture levels, addresses edema, helps prevent contractures, and safeguards the limb.38 From the start, using negative pressure wound dressings after surgical amputation can decrease wound-related complications.39
Topical oxygen therapy following amputation also shows promise. In a retrospective case series by Kalliainen et al,40 topical oxygen therapy applied to 58 wounds in 32 patients over 9 months demonstrated positive outcomes in promoting wound healing, with 38 wounds (66%) healing completely with the use of topical oxygen. Minimal complications and no detrimental effects were observed.40
Current recommendations suggest that non–weight-bearing removable rigid dressings are the superior postoperative management for transtibial amputations compared to soft dressings, offering benefits such as faster healing, reduced limb edema, earlier ambulation, preparatory shaping for prosthetic use, and prevention of knee flexion contractures.41-46 Similarly, adding a silicone liner following amputation significantly reduced the duration of prosthetic rehabilitation compared with a conventional soft dressing program in one study (P<.05).47
Specifically targeting wound edema, a case series by Hoskins et al48 investigated the impact of prostheses with vacuum-assisted suspension on the size of residual limb wounds in individuals with transtibial amputation. Well-fitting sockets with vacuum-assisted suspension did not impede wound healing, and the results suggest the potential for continued prosthesis use during the healing process.48 However, a study by Johannesson et al49 compared the outcomes of transtibial amputation patients using a vacuum-formed rigid dressing and a conventional rigid plaster dressing, finding no significant differences in wound healing, time to prosthetic fitting, or functional outcomes with the prosthesis between the 2 groups. When comparing elastic bandaging, pneumatic prosthesis, and temporary prosthesis on postoperative stump management, temporary prosthesis led to a decrease in stump volume, quicker transition to a permanent prosthesis, and improved quality of life compared with elastic bandaging and pneumatic prosthetics.50
The type of material in dressings may contribute to utility in amputation wounds. Keratin-based wound dressings show promise for wound healing, especially in recalcitrant vascular wounds.51 There also are numerous proprietary wound dressings available for patients, at least one of which has particularly thorough data. In a retrospective study of more than 2 million lower extremity wounds across 644 institutions, a proprietary bioactive human skin allograft (TheraSkin [LifeNet Health]) demonstrated higher healing rates, greater percentage area reductions, lower amputations, reduced recidivism, higher treatment completion, and fewer medical transfers compared with standard of care alone.52
Postamputation Dermatologic Concerns
After the postamputation wound heals, a notable concern is the prevalence of skin diseases affecting residual limbs. The stump site in amputees, marked by a delicate cutaneous landscape vulnerable to skin diseases, faces challenges arising from amputation-induced damage to various structures.53
When integrated into a prosthesis socket, the altered skin must acclimate to a humid environment and endure forces for which it is not well suited, especially during movement.53 Amputation remarkably alters normal tissue perfusion, which can lead to aberrant blood and lymphatic circulation in residual limbs.27,53 This compromised skin, often associated with a history of vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or malignancy, becomes immunocompromised, heightening the risk for dermatologic issues such as inflammation, infection, and malignancies.53 Unlike the resilient volar skin on palms and soles, stump skin lacks adaptation to withstand the compressive forces generated during ambulation, sometimes leading to skin disease and pain that result in abandonment of the prosthesis.53,54 Mechanical forces on the skin, especially in active patients eager to resume pre-injury lifestyles, contribute to skin breakdown. The dynamic nature of the residual limb, including muscle atrophy, gait changes, and weight fluctuations, complicates the prosthetic fitting process. Prosthesis abandonment remains a challenge, despite modern technologic advancements.
The occurrence of heterotopic ossification (extraskeletal bone formation) is another notable issue in military amputees.27,55-57 Poor prosthetic fit can lead to skin degradation, necessitating further surgery to address mispositioned bone formations. Orthopedic monitoring supplemented by appropriate imaging studies can benefit postamputation patients by detecting and preventing heterotopic ossification in its early stages.
Dermatologic issues, especially among lower limb amputees, are noteworthy, with a substantial percentage experiencing complications related to socket prosthetics, such as heat, sweating, sores, and skin irritation. Up to 41% of patients are seen regularly for a secondary skin disorder following amputation.58 As one might expect, persistent wounds, blisters, ulcers, and abscesses are some of the most typical cutaneous abnormalities affecting residual limbs with prostheses.27,58 More rare skin conditions also are documented in residual limbs, including cutaneous granuloma, verrucous carcinoma, bullous pemphigoid, and angiodermatitis.27,59-61
Treatments offered in the dermatology clinic often are similar to patients who have not had an amputation. For instance, hyperhidrosis can be treated with prescription antiperspirant, topical aluminum chloride, topical glycopyrronium, botulinum toxin, and iontophoresis, which can greatly decrease skin irritation and malodor. Subcutaneous neurotoxins such as botulinum toxin are especially useful for hyperhidrosis following amputation because a single treatment can last 3 to 6 months, whereas topicals must be applied multiple times per day and can be inherently irritating to the skin.27,62 Furthermore, ablative fractional resurfacing lasers also can help stimulate new collagen growth, increase skin mobility on residual limbs, smooth jagged scars, and aid prosthetic fitting.27,63 Perforated prosthetic liners also may be useful to address issues such as excessive sweating, demonstrating improvements in skin health, reduced sweating problems, and potential avoidance of surgical interventions.64
When comorbid skin conditions are at bay, preventive measures for excessive wound healing necessitate early recognition and timely intervention for residual limbs. Preventive techniques encompass the use of silicone gel sheeting, hypoallergenic microporous tape, and intralesional steroid injections.
Psychological Concerns—An overarching issue following amputation is the psychological toll the process imposes on the patient. Psychological concerns, including anxiety and depression, present additional challenges impacting residual limb hygiene and prosthetic maintenance. Chronic wounds are devastating to patients. These patients consistently express feeling ostracized from their community and anxious about unemployment, leaking fluid, or odor from the wound, as well as other social stigmata.62 Depression and anxiety can hinder a patient’s ability to care for their wound and make them more susceptible to the myriad issues that can ensue.
Recent Developments in Wound Healing
Wound healing is ripe for innovation that could assuage ailments that impact patients following amputation. A 2022 study by Abu El Hawa et al65 illustrated advanced progression in wound healing for patients taking statins, even though the statin group had increased age and number of comorbidities compared with patients not taking statins.
Nasseri and Sharifi66 showed the potential of antimicrobial peptides—small proteins with cationic charges and amphipathic structures exhibiting electrostatic interaction with microbial cell membranes—in promoting wound healing, particularly defensins and cathelicidin LL-37.They also discussed innovative delivery systems, such as nanoparticles and electrospun fibrous scaffolds, highlighting their potential as possibly more effective therapeutics than antibiotics, especially in the context of diabetic wound closure.66 Aimed at increased angiogenesis in the proliferative phase, there is evidence that N-acetylcysteine can increase amputation stump perfusion with the goal of better long-term wound healing and more efficient scar formation.67
Stem cell therapy, particularly employing cells from the human amniotic membrane, represents an auspicious avenue for antifibrotic treatment. Amniotic epithelial cells and amniotic mesenchymal cells, with their self-renewal and multilineage differentiation capabilities, exhibit anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic properties.4,5 A study by Dong et al68 aimed to assess the efficacy of cell therapy, particularly differentiated progenitor cell–based graft transplantation or autologous stem cell injection, in treating refractory skin injuries such as nonrevascularizable critical limb ischemic ulcers, venous leg ulcers, and diabetic lower limb ulcers. The findings demonstrated cell therapy effectively reduced the size of ulcers, improved wound closure rates, and decreased major amputation rates compared with standard therapy. Of note, cell therapy had limited impact on alleviating pain in patients with critical limb ischemia-related cutaneous ulcers.68
Final Thoughts
Wound care following amputation is a multidisciplinary endeavor, necessitating collaboration between many health care professionals. Dermatologists play a crucial role in providing routine care as well as addressing wound healing and related skin issues among amputation patients. As the field progresses, dermatologists are well positioned to make notable contributions and ensure enhanced outcomes, resulting in a better quality of life for patients facing the challenges of limb amputation and prosthetic use.
References
Brockes JP, Kumar A. Comparative aspects of animal regeneration. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2008;24:525-549. doi:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.24.110707.175336
Eming SA, Hammerschmidt M, Krieg T, et al. Interrelation of immunity and tissue repair or regeneration. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2009;20:517-527. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2009.04.009
Eming SA. Evolution of immune pathways in regeneration and repair: recent concepts and translational perspectives. Semin Immunol. 2014;26:275-276. doi:10.1016/j.smim.2014.09.001
Wang PH, Huang BS, Horng HC, et al. Wound healing. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2018;81:94-101. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2017.11.002
Velnar T, Bailey T, Smrkolj V. The wound healing process: an overview of the cellular and molecular mechanisms. J Int Med Res. 2009;37:1528-1542. doi:10.1177/147323000903700531
Gurtner GC, Werner S, Barrandon Y, et al. Wound repair and regeneration. Nature. 2008;453:314-321. doi:10.1038/nature07039
Eming SA, Martin P, Tomic-Canic M. Wound repair and regeneration: mechanisms, signaling, and translation. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:265sr6. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3009337
Eming SA, Brachvogel B, Odorisio T, et al. Regulation of angiogenesis: wound healing as a model. Prog Histochem Cytochem. 2007;42:115-170. doi:10.1016/j.proghi.2007.06.001
Janis JE, Harrison B. Wound healing: part I. basic science. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(3 suppl):9S-17S. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000002773
Profyris C, Tziotzios C, Do Vale I. Cutaneous scarring: pathophysiology, molecular mechanisms, and scar reduction therapeutics. part I: the molecular basis of scar formation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;66:1-10; quiz 11-12. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2011.05.055
Kwan P, Ding J, Tredget EE. MicroRNA 181b regulates decorin production by dermal fibroblasts and may be a potential therapy for hypertrophic scar. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0123054. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0123054
Ben W, Yang Y, Yuan J, et al. Human papillomavirus 16 E6 modulates the expression of host microRNAs in cervical cancer. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;54:364-370. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2014.06.007
Yu EH, Tu HF, Wu CH, et al. MicroRNA-21 promotes perineural invasion and impacts survival in patients with oral carcinoma. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2017;80:383-388. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2017.01.003
Wen KC, Sung PL, Yen MS, et al. MicroRNAs regulate several functions of normal tissues and malignancies. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;52:465-469. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2013.10.002
Babalola O, Mamalis A, Lev-Tov H, et al. The role of microRNAs in skin fibrosis. Arch Dermatol Res. 2013;305:763-776. doi:10.1007/s00403-013-1410-1
Hofer M, Hoferová Z, Falk M. Pharmacological modulation of radiation damage. does it exist a chance for other substances than hematopoietic growth factors and cytokines? Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18:1385. doi:10.3390/ijms18071385
Darby IA, Weller CD. Aspirin treatment for chronic wounds: potential beneficial and inhibitory effects. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25:7-12. doi:10.1111/wrr.12502
Khalid KA, Nawi AFM, Zulkifli N, et al. Aging and wound healing of the skin: a review of clinical and pathophysiological hallmarks. Life. 2022;12:2142. doi:10.3390/life12122142
Peacock HM, Gilbert EAB, Vickaryous MK. Scar‐free cutaneous wound healing in the leopard gecko, Eublepharis macularius. J Anat. 2015;227:596-610. doi:10.1111/joa.12368
Delorme SL, Lungu IM, Vickaryous MK. Scar‐free wound healing and regeneration following tail loss in the leopard gecko, Eublepharis macularius. Anat Rec. 2012;295:1575-1595. doi:10.1002/ar.22490
Brunauer R, Xia IG, Asrar SN, et al. Aging delays epimorphic regeneration in mice. J Gerontol Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021;76:1726-1733. doi:10.1093/gerona/glab131
Dolan CP, Yang TJ, Zimmel K, et al. Epimorphic regeneration of the mouse digit tip is finite. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2022;13:62. doi:10.1186/s13287-022-02741-2
Simkin J, Han M, Yu L, et al. The mouse digit tip: from wound healing to regeneration. Methods Mol Biol Clifton NJ. 2013;1037:419-435. doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-505-7_24
Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:422-429. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005
Dudek NL, Marks MB, Marshall SC, et al. Dermatologic conditions associated with use of a lower-extremity prosthesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:659-663. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2004.09.003
Lannan FM, Meyerle JH. The dermatologist’s role in amputee skin care. Cutis. 2019;103:86-90.
Dougherty AL, Mohrle CR, Galarneau MR, et al. Battlefield extremity injuries in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Injury. 2009;40:772-777. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2009.02.014
Epstein RA, Heinemann AW, McFarland LV. Quality of life for veterans and servicemembers with major traumatic limb loss from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47:373-385. doi:10.1682/jrrd.2009.03.0023
Pinzur MS, Gold J, Schwartz D, et al. Energy demands for walking in dysvascular amputees as related to the level of amputation. Orthopedics. 1992;15:1033-1036; discussion 1036-1037. doi:10.3928/0147-7447-19920901-07
Robinson V, Sansam K, Hirst L, et al. Major lower limb amputation–what, why and how to achieve the best results. Orthop Trauma. 2010;24:276-285. doi:10.1016/j.mporth.2010.03.017
Lu S, Wang C, Zhong W, et al. Amputation stump revision using a free sural neurocutaneous perforator flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:83-87. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000211
Kim SW, Jeon SB, Hwang KT, et al. Coverage of amputation stumps using a latissimus dorsi flap with a serratus anterior muscle flap: a comparative study. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:88-93. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000220
Pavey GJ, Formby PM, Hoyt BW, et al. Intrawound antibiotic powder decreases frequency of deep infection and severity of heterotopic ossification in combat lower extremity amputations. Clin Orthop. 2019;477:802-810. doi:10.1007/s11999.0000000000000090
Dunkel N, Belaieff W, Assal M, et al. Wound dehiscence and stump infection after lower limb amputation: risk factors and association with antibiotic use. J Orthop Sci Off J Jpn Orthop Assoc. 2012;17:588-594. doi:10.1007/s00776-012-0245-5
Rubin G, Orbach H, Rinott M, et al. The use of prophylactic antibiotics in treatment of fingertip amputation: a randomized prospective trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2015;33:645-647. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2015.02.002
Azarbal AF, Harris S, Mitchell EL, et al. Nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization is associated with increased wound occurrence after major lower extremity amputation. J Vasc Surg. 2015;62:401-405. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2015.02.052
Kwasniewski M, Mitchel D. Post amputation skin and wound care. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2022;33:857-870. doi:10.1016/j.pmr.2022.06.010
Chang H, Maldonado TS, Rockman CB, et al. Closed incision negative pressure wound therapy may decrease wound complications in major lower extremity amputations. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73:1041-1047. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.07.061
Kalliainen LK, Gordillo GM, Schlanger R, et al. Topical oxygen as an adjunct to wound healing: a clinical case series. Pathophysiol Off J Int Soc Pathophysiol. 2003;9:81-87. doi:10.1016/s0928-4680(02)00079-2
Reichmann JP, Stevens PM, Rheinstein J, et al. Removable rigid dressings for postoperative management of transtibial amputations: a review of published evidence. PM R. 2018;10:516-523. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.10.002
MacLean N, Fick GH. The effect of semirigid dressings on below-knee amputations. Phys Ther. 1994;74:668-673. doi:10.1093/ptj/74.7.668
Koonalinthip N, Sukthongsa A, Janchai S. Comparison of removable rigid dressing and elastic bandage for residual limb maturation in transtibial amputees: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101:1683-1688. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2020.05.009
Taylor L, Cavenett S, Stepien JM, et al. Removable rigid dressings: a retrospective case-note audit to determine the validity of post-amputation application. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2008;32:223-230. doi:10.1080/03093640802016795
Sumpio B, Shine SR, Mahler D, et al. A comparison of immediate postoperative rigid and soft dressings for below-knee amputations. Ann Vasc Surg. 2013;27:774-780. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2013.03.007
van Velzen AD, Nederhand MJ, Emmelot CH, et al. Early treatment of trans-tibial amputees: retrospective analysis of early fitting and elastic bandaging. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2005;29:3-12. doi:10.1080/17461550500069588
Chin T, Toda M. Results of prosthetic rehabilitation on managing transtibial vascular amputation with silicone liner after wound closure. J Int Med Res. 2016;44:957-967. doi:10.1177/0300060516647554
Hoskins RD, Sutton EE, Kinor D, et al. Using vacuum-assisted suspension to manage residual limb wounds in persons with transtibial amputation: a case series. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014;38:68-74. doi:10.1177/0309364613487547
Johannesson A, Larsson GU, Oberg T, et al. Comparison of vacuum-formed removable rigid dressing with conventional rigid dressing after transtibial amputation: similar outcome in a randomized controlled trial involving 27 patients. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:361-369. doi:10.1080/17453670710015265
Alsancak S, Köse SK, Altınkaynak H. Effect of elastic bandaging and prosthesis on the decrease in stump volume. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2011;45:14-22. doi:10.3944/AOTT.2011.2365
Than MP, Smith RA, Hammond C, et al. Keratin-based wound care products for treatment of resistant vascular wounds. J Clin Aesthetic Dermatol. 2012;5:31-35.
Gurtner GC, Garcia AD, Bakewell K, et al. A retrospective matched‐cohort study of 3994 lower extremity wounds of multiple etiologies across 644 institutions comparing a bioactive human skin allograft, TheraSkin, plus standard of care, to standard of care alone. Int Wound J. 2020;17:55-64. doi:10.1111/iwj.13231
Buikema KES, Meyerle JH. Amputation stump: privileged harbor for infections, tumors, and immune disorders. Clin Dermatol. 2014;32:670-677. doi:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2014.04.015
Yang NB, Garza LA, Foote CE, et al. High prevalence of stump dermatoses 38 years or more after amputation. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148:1283-1286. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2012.3004
Potter BK, Burns TC, Lacap AP, et al. Heterotopic ossification following traumatic and combat-related amputations. Prevalence, risk factors, and preliminary results of excision. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:476-486. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00412
Edwards DS, Kuhn KM, Potter BK, et al. Heterotopic ossification: a review of current understanding, treatment, and future. J Orthop Trauma. 2016;30(suppl 3):S27-S30. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000666
Tintle SM, Shawen SB, Forsberg JA, et al. Reoperation after combat-related major lower extremity amputations. J Orthop Trauma. 2014;28:232-237. doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182a53130
Bui KM, Raugi GJ, Nguyen VQ, et al. Skin problems in individuals with lower-limb loss: literature review and proposed classification system. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2009;46:1085-1090. doi:10.1682/jrrd.2009.04.0052
Turan H, Bas¸kan EB, Adim SB, et al. Acroangiodermatitis in a below-knee amputation stump. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2011;36:560-561. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2011.04037.x
Lin CH, Ma H, Chung MT, et al. Granulomatous cutaneous lesions associated with risperidone-induced hyperprolactinemia in an amputated upper limb. Int J Dermatol. 2012;51:75-78. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.04906.x
Schwartz RA, Bagley MP, Janniger CK, et al. Verrucous carcinoma of a leg amputation stump. Dermatologica. 1991;182:193-195. doi:10.1159/000247782
Campanati A, Diotallevi F, Radi G, et al. Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin B in focal hyperhidrosis: a narrative review. Toxins. 2023;15:147. doi:10.3390/toxins15020147
Anderson RR, Donelan MB, Hivnor C, et al. Laser treatment of traumatic scars with an emphasis on ablative fractional laser resurfacing: consensus report. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:187-193. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7761
McGrath M, McCarthy J, Gallego A, et al. The influence of perforated prosthetic liners on residual limb wound healing: a case report. Can Prosthet Orthot J. 2019;2:32723. doi:10.33137/cpoj.v2i1.32723
Abu El Hawa AA, Klein D, Bekeny JC, et al. The impact of statins on wound healing: an ally in treating the highly comorbid patient. J Wound Care. 2022;31(suppl 2):S36-S41. doi:10.12968/jowc.2022.31.Sup2.S36
Nasseri S, Sharifi M. Therapeutic potential of antimicrobial peptides for wound healing. Int J Pept Res Ther. 2022;28:38. doi:10.1007/s10989-021-10350-5
Lee JV, Engel C, Tay S, et al. N-Acetyl-Cysteine treatment after lower extremity amputation improves areas of perfusion defect and wound healing outcomes. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73:39-40. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.12.025
Dong Y, Yang Q, Sun X. Comprehensive analysis of cell therapy on chronic skin wound healing: a meta-analysis. Hum Gene Ther. 2021;32:787-795. doi:10.1089/hum.2020.275
From the Naval Medical Center San Diego, California.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
All authors are military service members. This work was prepared as part of their official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides that “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.” Title 17 U.S.C. 101 defines a United States Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties.
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, the Department of Defense, or the US Government.
Correspondence: David S. Kirwin, MD, Naval Medical Center San Diego Dermatology Department, 1261 34th St, Unit 31, San Diego, CA 92102 (dsk247@cornell.edu).
From the Naval Medical Center San Diego, California.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
All authors are military service members. This work was prepared as part of their official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides that “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.” Title 17 U.S.C. 101 defines a United States Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties.
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, the Department of Defense, or the US Government.
Correspondence: David S. Kirwin, MD, Naval Medical Center San Diego Dermatology Department, 1261 34th St, Unit 31, San Diego, CA 92102 (dsk247@cornell.edu).
Author and Disclosure Information
From the Naval Medical Center San Diego, California.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
All authors are military service members. This work was prepared as part of their official duties. Title 17 U.S.C. 105 provides that “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.” Title 17 U.S.C. 101 defines a United States Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties.
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, the Department of Defense, or the US Government.
Correspondence: David S. Kirwin, MD, Naval Medical Center San Diego Dermatology Department, 1261 34th St, Unit 31, San Diego, CA 92102 (dsk247@cornell.edu).
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF MILITARY DERMATOLOGISTS
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF MILITARY DERMATOLOGISTS
Restoring skin integrity and balance after injury is vital for survival, serving as a crucial defense mechanism against potential infections by preventing the entry of harmful pathogens. Moreover, proper healing is essential for restoring normal tissue function, allowing damaged tissues to repair and, in an ideal scenario, regenerate. Timely healing helps reduce the risk for complications, such as chronic wounds, which could lead to more severe issues if left untreated. Additionally, pain relief often is associated with effective wound healing as inflammatory responses diminish during the repair process.
The immune system plays a pivotal role in wound healing, influencing various repair mechanisms and ultimately determining the extent of scarring. Although inflammation is present throughout the repair response, recent studies have challenged the conventional belief of an inverse correlation between the intensity of inflammation and regenerative capacity. Inflammatory signals were found to be crucial for timely repair and fundamental processes in regeneration, possibly presenting a paradigm shift in the understanding of immunology.1-4 The complexities of wound healing are exemplified when evaluating and treating postamputation wounds. To address such a task, one needs a firm understanding of the science behind healing wounds and what can go wrong along the way.
Phases of Wound Healing
Wound healing is a complex process that involves a series of sequential yet overlapping phases, including hemostasis/inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling.
Hemostasis/Inflammation—The initial stage of wound healing involves hemostasis, in which the primary objective is to prevent blood loss and initiate inflammation. Platelets arrive at the wound site, forming a provisional clot that is crucial for subsequent healing phases.4-6 Platelets halt bleeding as well as act as a medium for cell migration and adhesion; they also are a source of growth factors and proinflammatory cytokines that herald the inflammatory response.4-7
Inflammation is characterized by the infiltration of immune cells, particularly neutrophils and macrophages. Neutrophils act as the first line of defense, clearing debris and preventing infection. Macrophages follow, phagocytizing apoptotic cells and releasing growth factors such as tumor necrosis factor α, vascular endothelial growth factor, and matrix metalloprotease 9, which stimulate the next phase.4-6,8 Typically, the hemostasis and inflammatory phase starts approximately 6 to 8 hours after wound origin and lasts 3 to 4 days.4,6,7
Proliferation—Following hemostasis and inflammation, the wound transitions into the proliferation phase, which is marked by the development of granulation tissue—a dynamic amalgamation of fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and inflammatory cells.1,4-8 Fibroblasts play a central role in synthesizing collagen, the primary structural protein in connective tissue. They also orchestrate synthesis of vitronectin, fibronectin, fibrin, and tenascin.4-6,8 Simultaneously, angiogenesis takes place, involving the creation of new blood vessels to supply essential nutrients and oxygen to the healing tissue.4,7,9 Growth factors such as transforming growth factor β and vascular endothelial growth factor coordinate cellular activities and foster tissue repair.4-6,8 The proliferation phase extends over days to weeks, laying the groundwork for subsequent tissue restructuring.
Remodeling—The final stage of wound healing is remodeling, an extended process that may persist for several months or, in some cases, years. Throughout this phase, the initially deposited collagen, predominantly type III collagen, undergoes transformation into mature type I collagen.4-6,8 This transformation is critical for reinstating the tissue’s strength and functionality. The balance between collagen synthesis and degradation is delicate, regulated by matrix metalloproteinases and inhibitors of metalloproteinases.4-8 Fibroblasts, myofibroblasts, and other cells coordinate this intricate process of tissue reorganization.4-7
The eventual outcome of the remodeling phase determines the appearance and functionality of the healed tissue. Any disruption in this phase can lead to complications, such as chronic wounds and hypertrophic scars/keloids.4-6 These abnormal healing processes are characterized by localized inflammation, heightened fibroblast function, and excessive accumulation of the extracellular matrix.4-8
Molecular Mechanisms
Comprehensive investigations—both in vivo and in vitro—have explored the intricate molecular mechanisms involved in heightened wound healing. Transforming growth factor β takes center stage as a crucial factor, prompting the transformation of fibroblasts into myofibroblasts and contributing to the deposition of extracellular matrix.2,4-8,10 Transforming growth factor β activates non-Smad signaling pathways, such as MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinase) and PI3K (phosphoinositide 3-kinase), influencing processes associated with fibrosis.5,11 Furthermore, microRNAs play a pivotal role in posttranscriptional regulation, influencing both transforming growth factor β signaling and fibroblast behavior.12-16
The involvement of prostaglandins is crucial in wound healing. Prostaglandin E2 plays a notable role and is positively correlated with the rate of wound healing.5 The cyclooxygenase pathway, pivotal for prostaglandin synthesis, becomes a target for inflammation control.4,5,10 Although aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs commonly are employed, their impact on wound healing remains controversial, as inhibition of cyclooxygenase may disrupt normal repair processes.5,17,18
Wound healing exhibits variations depending on age. Fetal skin regeneration is marked by the restoration of normal dermal architecture, including adnexal structures, nerves, vessels, and muscle.4-6 The distinctive characteristics of fetal wound healing include a unique profile of growth factors, a diminished inflammatory response, reduced biomechanical stress, and a distinct extracellular matrix composition.19 These factors contribute to a lower propensity for scar formation compared to the healing processes observed in adults. Fetal and adult wound healing differ fundamentally in their extracellular matrix composition, inflammatory cells, and cytokine levels.4-6,19 Adult wounds feature myofibroblasts, which are absent in fetal wounds, contributing to heightened mechanical tension.5 Delving deeper into the biochemical basis of fetal wound healing holds promise for mitigating scar formation in adults.
Takeaways From Other Species
Much of the biochemical knowledge of wound healing, especially regenerative wound healing, is known from other species. Geckos provide a unique model for studying regenerative repair in tails and nonregenerative healing in limbs after amputation. Scar-free wound healing is characterized by rapid wound closure, delayed blood vessel development, and collagen deposition, which contrasts with the hypervascular granulation tissue seen in scarring wounds.20 Scar-free wound healing and regeneration are intrinsic properties of the lizard tail and are unaffected by the location or method of detachment.21
Compared to amphibians with extraordinary regenerative capacity, data suggest the lack of regenerative capacity in mammals may come from a desynchronization of the fine-tuned interplay of progenitor cells such as blastema and differentiated cells.22,23 In mice, the response to amputation is specific to the level: cutting through the distal third of the terminal phalanx elicits a regeneration response, yielding a new digit tip resembling the lost one, while an amputation through the distal third of the intermediate phalanx triggers a wound healing and scarring response.24
Wound Healing Following Limb Amputation
Limb amputation represents a profound change in an individual’s life, impacting daily activities and overall well-being. There are many causes of amputation, but the most common include cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, cancer, and trauma.25-27 Trauma represents a relatively common cause within the US Military due to the overall young population as well as inherent risks of uniformed service.25,27 Advances in protective gear and combat casualty care have led to an increased number of individuals surviving with extremity injuries requiring amputation, particularly among younger service members, with a subgroup experiencing multiple amputations.27-29
Numerous factors play a crucial role in the healing and function of postamputation wounds. The level of amputation is a key determinant influencing both functional outcomes and the healing process. Achieving a balance between preserving function and removing damaged tissue is essential. A study investigating cardiac function and oxygen consumption in 25 patients with peripheral vascular disease found higher-level amputations resulted in decreased walking speed and cadence, along with increased oxygen consumption per meter walked.30
Selecting the appropriate amputation level is vital to optimize functional outcomes without compromising wound healing. Successful prosthetic limb fitting depends largely on the length of the residual stump to support the body load and suspend the prosthesis. For long bone amputations, maintaining at least 12-cm clearance above the knee joint in transfemoral amputees and 10-cm below the knee joint in transtibial amputees is critical for maximizing functional outcomes.31
Surgical technique also is paramount. The goal is to minimize the risk for pressure ulcers by avoiding bony spurs and muscle imbalances. Shaping the muscle and residual limb is essential for proper prosthesis fitting. Attention to neurovascular structures, such as burying nerve ends to prevent neuropathic pain during prosthesis wear, is crucial.32 In extremity amputations, surgeons often resort to free flap transfer techniques for stump reconstruction. In a study of 31 patients with severe lower extremity injuries undergoing various amputations, the use of latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flaps, alone or in combination with serratus anterior muscle flaps, resulted in fewer instances of deep ulceration and allowed for earlier prosthesis wear.33
Addressing Barriers to Wound Healing
Multiple barriers to successful wound healing are encountered in the amputee population. Amputations from trauma have a less-controlled initiation, which carries with it a higher risk for infection, poor wound healing, and other complications.
Infection—Infection often is one of the first hurdles encountered in postamputation wound healing. Critical first steps in infection prevention include thorough cleaning of soiled traumatic wounds and appropriate tissue debridement coupled with scrupulous sterile technique and postoperative monitoring for signs and symptoms of infection.
In a retrospective study of 223 combat-related major lower extremity amputations (initial and revision) between 2009 and 2015, the use of intrawound antibiotic powder at the time of closure demonstrated a 13% absolute risk reduction in deep infection rates, which was particularly notable in revision amputations, with a number needed to treat of 8 for initial amputations and 4 for revision amputations on previously infected limbs.34 Intra-operative antibiotic powder may represent a cheap and easy consideration for this special population of amputees. Postamputation antibiotic prophylaxis for infection prevention is an area of controversy. For nontraumatic infections, data suggest antibiotic prophylaxis may not decrease infection rates in these patients.35,36
Interestingly, a study by Azarbal et al37 aimed to investigate the correlation between nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization and other patient factors with wound occurrence following major lower extremity amputation. The study found MRSA colonization was associated with higher rates of overall wound occurrence as well as wound occurrence due to wound infection. These data suggest nasal MRSA eradication may improve postoperative wound outcomes after major lower extremity amputation.37
Dressing Choice—The dressing chosen for a residual limb also is of paramount importance following amputation. The personalized and dynamic management of postamputation wounds and skin involves achieving optimal healing through a dressing that sustains appropriate moisture levels, addresses edema, helps prevent contractures, and safeguards the limb.38 From the start, using negative pressure wound dressings after surgical amputation can decrease wound-related complications.39
Topical oxygen therapy following amputation also shows promise. In a retrospective case series by Kalliainen et al,40 topical oxygen therapy applied to 58 wounds in 32 patients over 9 months demonstrated positive outcomes in promoting wound healing, with 38 wounds (66%) healing completely with the use of topical oxygen. Minimal complications and no detrimental effects were observed.40
Current recommendations suggest that non–weight-bearing removable rigid dressings are the superior postoperative management for transtibial amputations compared to soft dressings, offering benefits such as faster healing, reduced limb edema, earlier ambulation, preparatory shaping for prosthetic use, and prevention of knee flexion contractures.41-46 Similarly, adding a silicone liner following amputation significantly reduced the duration of prosthetic rehabilitation compared with a conventional soft dressing program in one study (P<.05).47
Specifically targeting wound edema, a case series by Hoskins et al48 investigated the impact of prostheses with vacuum-assisted suspension on the size of residual limb wounds in individuals with transtibial amputation. Well-fitting sockets with vacuum-assisted suspension did not impede wound healing, and the results suggest the potential for continued prosthesis use during the healing process.48 However, a study by Johannesson et al49 compared the outcomes of transtibial amputation patients using a vacuum-formed rigid dressing and a conventional rigid plaster dressing, finding no significant differences in wound healing, time to prosthetic fitting, or functional outcomes with the prosthesis between the 2 groups. When comparing elastic bandaging, pneumatic prosthesis, and temporary prosthesis on postoperative stump management, temporary prosthesis led to a decrease in stump volume, quicker transition to a permanent prosthesis, and improved quality of life compared with elastic bandaging and pneumatic prosthetics.50
The type of material in dressings may contribute to utility in amputation wounds. Keratin-based wound dressings show promise for wound healing, especially in recalcitrant vascular wounds.51 There also are numerous proprietary wound dressings available for patients, at least one of which has particularly thorough data. In a retrospective study of more than 2 million lower extremity wounds across 644 institutions, a proprietary bioactive human skin allograft (TheraSkin [LifeNet Health]) demonstrated higher healing rates, greater percentage area reductions, lower amputations, reduced recidivism, higher treatment completion, and fewer medical transfers compared with standard of care alone.52
Postamputation Dermatologic Concerns
After the postamputation wound heals, a notable concern is the prevalence of skin diseases affecting residual limbs. The stump site in amputees, marked by a delicate cutaneous landscape vulnerable to skin diseases, faces challenges arising from amputation-induced damage to various structures.53
When integrated into a prosthesis socket, the altered skin must acclimate to a humid environment and endure forces for which it is not well suited, especially during movement.53 Amputation remarkably alters normal tissue perfusion, which can lead to aberrant blood and lymphatic circulation in residual limbs.27,53 This compromised skin, often associated with a history of vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or malignancy, becomes immunocompromised, heightening the risk for dermatologic issues such as inflammation, infection, and malignancies.53 Unlike the resilient volar skin on palms and soles, stump skin lacks adaptation to withstand the compressive forces generated during ambulation, sometimes leading to skin disease and pain that result in abandonment of the prosthesis.53,54 Mechanical forces on the skin, especially in active patients eager to resume pre-injury lifestyles, contribute to skin breakdown. The dynamic nature of the residual limb, including muscle atrophy, gait changes, and weight fluctuations, complicates the prosthetic fitting process. Prosthesis abandonment remains a challenge, despite modern technologic advancements.
The occurrence of heterotopic ossification (extraskeletal bone formation) is another notable issue in military amputees.27,55-57 Poor prosthetic fit can lead to skin degradation, necessitating further surgery to address mispositioned bone formations. Orthopedic monitoring supplemented by appropriate imaging studies can benefit postamputation patients by detecting and preventing heterotopic ossification in its early stages.
Dermatologic issues, especially among lower limb amputees, are noteworthy, with a substantial percentage experiencing complications related to socket prosthetics, such as heat, sweating, sores, and skin irritation. Up to 41% of patients are seen regularly for a secondary skin disorder following amputation.58 As one might expect, persistent wounds, blisters, ulcers, and abscesses are some of the most typical cutaneous abnormalities affecting residual limbs with prostheses.27,58 More rare skin conditions also are documented in residual limbs, including cutaneous granuloma, verrucous carcinoma, bullous pemphigoid, and angiodermatitis.27,59-61
Treatments offered in the dermatology clinic often are similar to patients who have not had an amputation. For instance, hyperhidrosis can be treated with prescription antiperspirant, topical aluminum chloride, topical glycopyrronium, botulinum toxin, and iontophoresis, which can greatly decrease skin irritation and malodor. Subcutaneous neurotoxins such as botulinum toxin are especially useful for hyperhidrosis following amputation because a single treatment can last 3 to 6 months, whereas topicals must be applied multiple times per day and can be inherently irritating to the skin.27,62 Furthermore, ablative fractional resurfacing lasers also can help stimulate new collagen growth, increase skin mobility on residual limbs, smooth jagged scars, and aid prosthetic fitting.27,63 Perforated prosthetic liners also may be useful to address issues such as excessive sweating, demonstrating improvements in skin health, reduced sweating problems, and potential avoidance of surgical interventions.64
When comorbid skin conditions are at bay, preventive measures for excessive wound healing necessitate early recognition and timely intervention for residual limbs. Preventive techniques encompass the use of silicone gel sheeting, hypoallergenic microporous tape, and intralesional steroid injections.
Psychological Concerns—An overarching issue following amputation is the psychological toll the process imposes on the patient. Psychological concerns, including anxiety and depression, present additional challenges impacting residual limb hygiene and prosthetic maintenance. Chronic wounds are devastating to patients. These patients consistently express feeling ostracized from their community and anxious about unemployment, leaking fluid, or odor from the wound, as well as other social stigmata.62 Depression and anxiety can hinder a patient’s ability to care for their wound and make them more susceptible to the myriad issues that can ensue.
Recent Developments in Wound Healing
Wound healing is ripe for innovation that could assuage ailments that impact patients following amputation. A 2022 study by Abu El Hawa et al65 illustrated advanced progression in wound healing for patients taking statins, even though the statin group had increased age and number of comorbidities compared with patients not taking statins.
Nasseri and Sharifi66 showed the potential of antimicrobial peptides—small proteins with cationic charges and amphipathic structures exhibiting electrostatic interaction with microbial cell membranes—in promoting wound healing, particularly defensins and cathelicidin LL-37.They also discussed innovative delivery systems, such as nanoparticles and electrospun fibrous scaffolds, highlighting their potential as possibly more effective therapeutics than antibiotics, especially in the context of diabetic wound closure.66 Aimed at increased angiogenesis in the proliferative phase, there is evidence that N-acetylcysteine can increase amputation stump perfusion with the goal of better long-term wound healing and more efficient scar formation.67
Stem cell therapy, particularly employing cells from the human amniotic membrane, represents an auspicious avenue for antifibrotic treatment. Amniotic epithelial cells and amniotic mesenchymal cells, with their self-renewal and multilineage differentiation capabilities, exhibit anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic properties.4,5 A study by Dong et al68 aimed to assess the efficacy of cell therapy, particularly differentiated progenitor cell–based graft transplantation or autologous stem cell injection, in treating refractory skin injuries such as nonrevascularizable critical limb ischemic ulcers, venous leg ulcers, and diabetic lower limb ulcers. The findings demonstrated cell therapy effectively reduced the size of ulcers, improved wound closure rates, and decreased major amputation rates compared with standard therapy. Of note, cell therapy had limited impact on alleviating pain in patients with critical limb ischemia-related cutaneous ulcers.68
Final Thoughts
Wound care following amputation is a multidisciplinary endeavor, necessitating collaboration between many health care professionals. Dermatologists play a crucial role in providing routine care as well as addressing wound healing and related skin issues among amputation patients. As the field progresses, dermatologists are well positioned to make notable contributions and ensure enhanced outcomes, resulting in a better quality of life for patients facing the challenges of limb amputation and prosthetic use.
Restoring skin integrity and balance after injury is vital for survival, serving as a crucial defense mechanism against potential infections by preventing the entry of harmful pathogens. Moreover, proper healing is essential for restoring normal tissue function, allowing damaged tissues to repair and, in an ideal scenario, regenerate. Timely healing helps reduce the risk for complications, such as chronic wounds, which could lead to more severe issues if left untreated. Additionally, pain relief often is associated with effective wound healing as inflammatory responses diminish during the repair process.
The immune system plays a pivotal role in wound healing, influencing various repair mechanisms and ultimately determining the extent of scarring. Although inflammation is present throughout the repair response, recent studies have challenged the conventional belief of an inverse correlation between the intensity of inflammation and regenerative capacity. Inflammatory signals were found to be crucial for timely repair and fundamental processes in regeneration, possibly presenting a paradigm shift in the understanding of immunology.1-4 The complexities of wound healing are exemplified when evaluating and treating postamputation wounds. To address such a task, one needs a firm understanding of the science behind healing wounds and what can go wrong along the way.
Phases of Wound Healing
Wound healing is a complex process that involves a series of sequential yet overlapping phases, including hemostasis/inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling.
Hemostasis/Inflammation—The initial stage of wound healing involves hemostasis, in which the primary objective is to prevent blood loss and initiate inflammation. Platelets arrive at the wound site, forming a provisional clot that is crucial for subsequent healing phases.4-6 Platelets halt bleeding as well as act as a medium for cell migration and adhesion; they also are a source of growth factors and proinflammatory cytokines that herald the inflammatory response.4-7
Inflammation is characterized by the infiltration of immune cells, particularly neutrophils and macrophages. Neutrophils act as the first line of defense, clearing debris and preventing infection. Macrophages follow, phagocytizing apoptotic cells and releasing growth factors such as tumor necrosis factor α, vascular endothelial growth factor, and matrix metalloprotease 9, which stimulate the next phase.4-6,8 Typically, the hemostasis and inflammatory phase starts approximately 6 to 8 hours after wound origin and lasts 3 to 4 days.4,6,7
Proliferation—Following hemostasis and inflammation, the wound transitions into the proliferation phase, which is marked by the development of granulation tissue—a dynamic amalgamation of fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and inflammatory cells.1,4-8 Fibroblasts play a central role in synthesizing collagen, the primary structural protein in connective tissue. They also orchestrate synthesis of vitronectin, fibronectin, fibrin, and tenascin.4-6,8 Simultaneously, angiogenesis takes place, involving the creation of new blood vessels to supply essential nutrients and oxygen to the healing tissue.4,7,9 Growth factors such as transforming growth factor β and vascular endothelial growth factor coordinate cellular activities and foster tissue repair.4-6,8 The proliferation phase extends over days to weeks, laying the groundwork for subsequent tissue restructuring.
Remodeling—The final stage of wound healing is remodeling, an extended process that may persist for several months or, in some cases, years. Throughout this phase, the initially deposited collagen, predominantly type III collagen, undergoes transformation into mature type I collagen.4-6,8 This transformation is critical for reinstating the tissue’s strength and functionality. The balance between collagen synthesis and degradation is delicate, regulated by matrix metalloproteinases and inhibitors of metalloproteinases.4-8 Fibroblasts, myofibroblasts, and other cells coordinate this intricate process of tissue reorganization.4-7
The eventual outcome of the remodeling phase determines the appearance and functionality of the healed tissue. Any disruption in this phase can lead to complications, such as chronic wounds and hypertrophic scars/keloids.4-6 These abnormal healing processes are characterized by localized inflammation, heightened fibroblast function, and excessive accumulation of the extracellular matrix.4-8
Molecular Mechanisms
Comprehensive investigations—both in vivo and in vitro—have explored the intricate molecular mechanisms involved in heightened wound healing. Transforming growth factor β takes center stage as a crucial factor, prompting the transformation of fibroblasts into myofibroblasts and contributing to the deposition of extracellular matrix.2,4-8,10 Transforming growth factor β activates non-Smad signaling pathways, such as MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinase) and PI3K (phosphoinositide 3-kinase), influencing processes associated with fibrosis.5,11 Furthermore, microRNAs play a pivotal role in posttranscriptional regulation, influencing both transforming growth factor β signaling and fibroblast behavior.12-16
The involvement of prostaglandins is crucial in wound healing. Prostaglandin E2 plays a notable role and is positively correlated with the rate of wound healing.5 The cyclooxygenase pathway, pivotal for prostaglandin synthesis, becomes a target for inflammation control.4,5,10 Although aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs commonly are employed, their impact on wound healing remains controversial, as inhibition of cyclooxygenase may disrupt normal repair processes.5,17,18
Wound healing exhibits variations depending on age. Fetal skin regeneration is marked by the restoration of normal dermal architecture, including adnexal structures, nerves, vessels, and muscle.4-6 The distinctive characteristics of fetal wound healing include a unique profile of growth factors, a diminished inflammatory response, reduced biomechanical stress, and a distinct extracellular matrix composition.19 These factors contribute to a lower propensity for scar formation compared to the healing processes observed in adults. Fetal and adult wound healing differ fundamentally in their extracellular matrix composition, inflammatory cells, and cytokine levels.4-6,19 Adult wounds feature myofibroblasts, which are absent in fetal wounds, contributing to heightened mechanical tension.5 Delving deeper into the biochemical basis of fetal wound healing holds promise for mitigating scar formation in adults.
Takeaways From Other Species
Much of the biochemical knowledge of wound healing, especially regenerative wound healing, is known from other species. Geckos provide a unique model for studying regenerative repair in tails and nonregenerative healing in limbs after amputation. Scar-free wound healing is characterized by rapid wound closure, delayed blood vessel development, and collagen deposition, which contrasts with the hypervascular granulation tissue seen in scarring wounds.20 Scar-free wound healing and regeneration are intrinsic properties of the lizard tail and are unaffected by the location or method of detachment.21
Compared to amphibians with extraordinary regenerative capacity, data suggest the lack of regenerative capacity in mammals may come from a desynchronization of the fine-tuned interplay of progenitor cells such as blastema and differentiated cells.22,23 In mice, the response to amputation is specific to the level: cutting through the distal third of the terminal phalanx elicits a regeneration response, yielding a new digit tip resembling the lost one, while an amputation through the distal third of the intermediate phalanx triggers a wound healing and scarring response.24
Wound Healing Following Limb Amputation
Limb amputation represents a profound change in an individual’s life, impacting daily activities and overall well-being. There are many causes of amputation, but the most common include cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, cancer, and trauma.25-27 Trauma represents a relatively common cause within the US Military due to the overall young population as well as inherent risks of uniformed service.25,27 Advances in protective gear and combat casualty care have led to an increased number of individuals surviving with extremity injuries requiring amputation, particularly among younger service members, with a subgroup experiencing multiple amputations.27-29
Numerous factors play a crucial role in the healing and function of postamputation wounds. The level of amputation is a key determinant influencing both functional outcomes and the healing process. Achieving a balance between preserving function and removing damaged tissue is essential. A study investigating cardiac function and oxygen consumption in 25 patients with peripheral vascular disease found higher-level amputations resulted in decreased walking speed and cadence, along with increased oxygen consumption per meter walked.30
Selecting the appropriate amputation level is vital to optimize functional outcomes without compromising wound healing. Successful prosthetic limb fitting depends largely on the length of the residual stump to support the body load and suspend the prosthesis. For long bone amputations, maintaining at least 12-cm clearance above the knee joint in transfemoral amputees and 10-cm below the knee joint in transtibial amputees is critical for maximizing functional outcomes.31
Surgical technique also is paramount. The goal is to minimize the risk for pressure ulcers by avoiding bony spurs and muscle imbalances. Shaping the muscle and residual limb is essential for proper prosthesis fitting. Attention to neurovascular structures, such as burying nerve ends to prevent neuropathic pain during prosthesis wear, is crucial.32 In extremity amputations, surgeons often resort to free flap transfer techniques for stump reconstruction. In a study of 31 patients with severe lower extremity injuries undergoing various amputations, the use of latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flaps, alone or in combination with serratus anterior muscle flaps, resulted in fewer instances of deep ulceration and allowed for earlier prosthesis wear.33
Addressing Barriers to Wound Healing
Multiple barriers to successful wound healing are encountered in the amputee population. Amputations from trauma have a less-controlled initiation, which carries with it a higher risk for infection, poor wound healing, and other complications.
Infection—Infection often is one of the first hurdles encountered in postamputation wound healing. Critical first steps in infection prevention include thorough cleaning of soiled traumatic wounds and appropriate tissue debridement coupled with scrupulous sterile technique and postoperative monitoring for signs and symptoms of infection.
In a retrospective study of 223 combat-related major lower extremity amputations (initial and revision) between 2009 and 2015, the use of intrawound antibiotic powder at the time of closure demonstrated a 13% absolute risk reduction in deep infection rates, which was particularly notable in revision amputations, with a number needed to treat of 8 for initial amputations and 4 for revision amputations on previously infected limbs.34 Intra-operative antibiotic powder may represent a cheap and easy consideration for this special population of amputees. Postamputation antibiotic prophylaxis for infection prevention is an area of controversy. For nontraumatic infections, data suggest antibiotic prophylaxis may not decrease infection rates in these patients.35,36
Interestingly, a study by Azarbal et al37 aimed to investigate the correlation between nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization and other patient factors with wound occurrence following major lower extremity amputation. The study found MRSA colonization was associated with higher rates of overall wound occurrence as well as wound occurrence due to wound infection. These data suggest nasal MRSA eradication may improve postoperative wound outcomes after major lower extremity amputation.37
Dressing Choice—The dressing chosen for a residual limb also is of paramount importance following amputation. The personalized and dynamic management of postamputation wounds and skin involves achieving optimal healing through a dressing that sustains appropriate moisture levels, addresses edema, helps prevent contractures, and safeguards the limb.38 From the start, using negative pressure wound dressings after surgical amputation can decrease wound-related complications.39
Topical oxygen therapy following amputation also shows promise. In a retrospective case series by Kalliainen et al,40 topical oxygen therapy applied to 58 wounds in 32 patients over 9 months demonstrated positive outcomes in promoting wound healing, with 38 wounds (66%) healing completely with the use of topical oxygen. Minimal complications and no detrimental effects were observed.40
Current recommendations suggest that non–weight-bearing removable rigid dressings are the superior postoperative management for transtibial amputations compared to soft dressings, offering benefits such as faster healing, reduced limb edema, earlier ambulation, preparatory shaping for prosthetic use, and prevention of knee flexion contractures.41-46 Similarly, adding a silicone liner following amputation significantly reduced the duration of prosthetic rehabilitation compared with a conventional soft dressing program in one study (P<.05).47
Specifically targeting wound edema, a case series by Hoskins et al48 investigated the impact of prostheses with vacuum-assisted suspension on the size of residual limb wounds in individuals with transtibial amputation. Well-fitting sockets with vacuum-assisted suspension did not impede wound healing, and the results suggest the potential for continued prosthesis use during the healing process.48 However, a study by Johannesson et al49 compared the outcomes of transtibial amputation patients using a vacuum-formed rigid dressing and a conventional rigid plaster dressing, finding no significant differences in wound healing, time to prosthetic fitting, or functional outcomes with the prosthesis between the 2 groups. When comparing elastic bandaging, pneumatic prosthesis, and temporary prosthesis on postoperative stump management, temporary prosthesis led to a decrease in stump volume, quicker transition to a permanent prosthesis, and improved quality of life compared with elastic bandaging and pneumatic prosthetics.50
The type of material in dressings may contribute to utility in amputation wounds. Keratin-based wound dressings show promise for wound healing, especially in recalcitrant vascular wounds.51 There also are numerous proprietary wound dressings available for patients, at least one of which has particularly thorough data. In a retrospective study of more than 2 million lower extremity wounds across 644 institutions, a proprietary bioactive human skin allograft (TheraSkin [LifeNet Health]) demonstrated higher healing rates, greater percentage area reductions, lower amputations, reduced recidivism, higher treatment completion, and fewer medical transfers compared with standard of care alone.52
Postamputation Dermatologic Concerns
After the postamputation wound heals, a notable concern is the prevalence of skin diseases affecting residual limbs. The stump site in amputees, marked by a delicate cutaneous landscape vulnerable to skin diseases, faces challenges arising from amputation-induced damage to various structures.53
When integrated into a prosthesis socket, the altered skin must acclimate to a humid environment and endure forces for which it is not well suited, especially during movement.53 Amputation remarkably alters normal tissue perfusion, which can lead to aberrant blood and lymphatic circulation in residual limbs.27,53 This compromised skin, often associated with a history of vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or malignancy, becomes immunocompromised, heightening the risk for dermatologic issues such as inflammation, infection, and malignancies.53 Unlike the resilient volar skin on palms and soles, stump skin lacks adaptation to withstand the compressive forces generated during ambulation, sometimes leading to skin disease and pain that result in abandonment of the prosthesis.53,54 Mechanical forces on the skin, especially in active patients eager to resume pre-injury lifestyles, contribute to skin breakdown. The dynamic nature of the residual limb, including muscle atrophy, gait changes, and weight fluctuations, complicates the prosthetic fitting process. Prosthesis abandonment remains a challenge, despite modern technologic advancements.
The occurrence of heterotopic ossification (extraskeletal bone formation) is another notable issue in military amputees.27,55-57 Poor prosthetic fit can lead to skin degradation, necessitating further surgery to address mispositioned bone formations. Orthopedic monitoring supplemented by appropriate imaging studies can benefit postamputation patients by detecting and preventing heterotopic ossification in its early stages.
Dermatologic issues, especially among lower limb amputees, are noteworthy, with a substantial percentage experiencing complications related to socket prosthetics, such as heat, sweating, sores, and skin irritation. Up to 41% of patients are seen regularly for a secondary skin disorder following amputation.58 As one might expect, persistent wounds, blisters, ulcers, and abscesses are some of the most typical cutaneous abnormalities affecting residual limbs with prostheses.27,58 More rare skin conditions also are documented in residual limbs, including cutaneous granuloma, verrucous carcinoma, bullous pemphigoid, and angiodermatitis.27,59-61
Treatments offered in the dermatology clinic often are similar to patients who have not had an amputation. For instance, hyperhidrosis can be treated with prescription antiperspirant, topical aluminum chloride, topical glycopyrronium, botulinum toxin, and iontophoresis, which can greatly decrease skin irritation and malodor. Subcutaneous neurotoxins such as botulinum toxin are especially useful for hyperhidrosis following amputation because a single treatment can last 3 to 6 months, whereas topicals must be applied multiple times per day and can be inherently irritating to the skin.27,62 Furthermore, ablative fractional resurfacing lasers also can help stimulate new collagen growth, increase skin mobility on residual limbs, smooth jagged scars, and aid prosthetic fitting.27,63 Perforated prosthetic liners also may be useful to address issues such as excessive sweating, demonstrating improvements in skin health, reduced sweating problems, and potential avoidance of surgical interventions.64
When comorbid skin conditions are at bay, preventive measures for excessive wound healing necessitate early recognition and timely intervention for residual limbs. Preventive techniques encompass the use of silicone gel sheeting, hypoallergenic microporous tape, and intralesional steroid injections.
Psychological Concerns—An overarching issue following amputation is the psychological toll the process imposes on the patient. Psychological concerns, including anxiety and depression, present additional challenges impacting residual limb hygiene and prosthetic maintenance. Chronic wounds are devastating to patients. These patients consistently express feeling ostracized from their community and anxious about unemployment, leaking fluid, or odor from the wound, as well as other social stigmata.62 Depression and anxiety can hinder a patient’s ability to care for their wound and make them more susceptible to the myriad issues that can ensue.
Recent Developments in Wound Healing
Wound healing is ripe for innovation that could assuage ailments that impact patients following amputation. A 2022 study by Abu El Hawa et al65 illustrated advanced progression in wound healing for patients taking statins, even though the statin group had increased age and number of comorbidities compared with patients not taking statins.
Nasseri and Sharifi66 showed the potential of antimicrobial peptides—small proteins with cationic charges and amphipathic structures exhibiting electrostatic interaction with microbial cell membranes—in promoting wound healing, particularly defensins and cathelicidin LL-37.They also discussed innovative delivery systems, such as nanoparticles and electrospun fibrous scaffolds, highlighting their potential as possibly more effective therapeutics than antibiotics, especially in the context of diabetic wound closure.66 Aimed at increased angiogenesis in the proliferative phase, there is evidence that N-acetylcysteine can increase amputation stump perfusion with the goal of better long-term wound healing and more efficient scar formation.67
Stem cell therapy, particularly employing cells from the human amniotic membrane, represents an auspicious avenue for antifibrotic treatment. Amniotic epithelial cells and amniotic mesenchymal cells, with their self-renewal and multilineage differentiation capabilities, exhibit anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic properties.4,5 A study by Dong et al68 aimed to assess the efficacy of cell therapy, particularly differentiated progenitor cell–based graft transplantation or autologous stem cell injection, in treating refractory skin injuries such as nonrevascularizable critical limb ischemic ulcers, venous leg ulcers, and diabetic lower limb ulcers. The findings demonstrated cell therapy effectively reduced the size of ulcers, improved wound closure rates, and decreased major amputation rates compared with standard therapy. Of note, cell therapy had limited impact on alleviating pain in patients with critical limb ischemia-related cutaneous ulcers.68
Final Thoughts
Wound care following amputation is a multidisciplinary endeavor, necessitating collaboration between many health care professionals. Dermatologists play a crucial role in providing routine care as well as addressing wound healing and related skin issues among amputation patients. As the field progresses, dermatologists are well positioned to make notable contributions and ensure enhanced outcomes, resulting in a better quality of life for patients facing the challenges of limb amputation and prosthetic use.
References
Brockes JP, Kumar A. Comparative aspects of animal regeneration. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2008;24:525-549. doi:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.24.110707.175336
Eming SA, Hammerschmidt M, Krieg T, et al. Interrelation of immunity and tissue repair or regeneration. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2009;20:517-527. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2009.04.009
Eming SA. Evolution of immune pathways in regeneration and repair: recent concepts and translational perspectives. Semin Immunol. 2014;26:275-276. doi:10.1016/j.smim.2014.09.001
Wang PH, Huang BS, Horng HC, et al. Wound healing. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2018;81:94-101. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2017.11.002
Velnar T, Bailey T, Smrkolj V. The wound healing process: an overview of the cellular and molecular mechanisms. J Int Med Res. 2009;37:1528-1542. doi:10.1177/147323000903700531
Gurtner GC, Werner S, Barrandon Y, et al. Wound repair and regeneration. Nature. 2008;453:314-321. doi:10.1038/nature07039
Eming SA, Martin P, Tomic-Canic M. Wound repair and regeneration: mechanisms, signaling, and translation. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:265sr6. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3009337
Eming SA, Brachvogel B, Odorisio T, et al. Regulation of angiogenesis: wound healing as a model. Prog Histochem Cytochem. 2007;42:115-170. doi:10.1016/j.proghi.2007.06.001
Janis JE, Harrison B. Wound healing: part I. basic science. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(3 suppl):9S-17S. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000002773
Profyris C, Tziotzios C, Do Vale I. Cutaneous scarring: pathophysiology, molecular mechanisms, and scar reduction therapeutics. part I: the molecular basis of scar formation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;66:1-10; quiz 11-12. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2011.05.055
Kwan P, Ding J, Tredget EE. MicroRNA 181b regulates decorin production by dermal fibroblasts and may be a potential therapy for hypertrophic scar. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0123054. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0123054
Ben W, Yang Y, Yuan J, et al. Human papillomavirus 16 E6 modulates the expression of host microRNAs in cervical cancer. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;54:364-370. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2014.06.007
Yu EH, Tu HF, Wu CH, et al. MicroRNA-21 promotes perineural invasion and impacts survival in patients with oral carcinoma. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2017;80:383-388. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2017.01.003
Wen KC, Sung PL, Yen MS, et al. MicroRNAs regulate several functions of normal tissues and malignancies. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;52:465-469. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2013.10.002
Babalola O, Mamalis A, Lev-Tov H, et al. The role of microRNAs in skin fibrosis. Arch Dermatol Res. 2013;305:763-776. doi:10.1007/s00403-013-1410-1
Hofer M, Hoferová Z, Falk M. Pharmacological modulation of radiation damage. does it exist a chance for other substances than hematopoietic growth factors and cytokines? Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18:1385. doi:10.3390/ijms18071385
Darby IA, Weller CD. Aspirin treatment for chronic wounds: potential beneficial and inhibitory effects. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25:7-12. doi:10.1111/wrr.12502
Khalid KA, Nawi AFM, Zulkifli N, et al. Aging and wound healing of the skin: a review of clinical and pathophysiological hallmarks. Life. 2022;12:2142. doi:10.3390/life12122142
Peacock HM, Gilbert EAB, Vickaryous MK. Scar‐free cutaneous wound healing in the leopard gecko, Eublepharis macularius. J Anat. 2015;227:596-610. doi:10.1111/joa.12368
Delorme SL, Lungu IM, Vickaryous MK. Scar‐free wound healing and regeneration following tail loss in the leopard gecko, Eublepharis macularius. Anat Rec. 2012;295:1575-1595. doi:10.1002/ar.22490
Brunauer R, Xia IG, Asrar SN, et al. Aging delays epimorphic regeneration in mice. J Gerontol Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021;76:1726-1733. doi:10.1093/gerona/glab131
Dolan CP, Yang TJ, Zimmel K, et al. Epimorphic regeneration of the mouse digit tip is finite. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2022;13:62. doi:10.1186/s13287-022-02741-2
Simkin J, Han M, Yu L, et al. The mouse digit tip: from wound healing to regeneration. Methods Mol Biol Clifton NJ. 2013;1037:419-435. doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-505-7_24
Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:422-429. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005
Dudek NL, Marks MB, Marshall SC, et al. Dermatologic conditions associated with use of a lower-extremity prosthesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:659-663. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2004.09.003
Lannan FM, Meyerle JH. The dermatologist’s role in amputee skin care. Cutis. 2019;103:86-90.
Dougherty AL, Mohrle CR, Galarneau MR, et al. Battlefield extremity injuries in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Injury. 2009;40:772-777. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2009.02.014
Epstein RA, Heinemann AW, McFarland LV. Quality of life for veterans and servicemembers with major traumatic limb loss from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47:373-385. doi:10.1682/jrrd.2009.03.0023
Pinzur MS, Gold J, Schwartz D, et al. Energy demands for walking in dysvascular amputees as related to the level of amputation. Orthopedics. 1992;15:1033-1036; discussion 1036-1037. doi:10.3928/0147-7447-19920901-07
Robinson V, Sansam K, Hirst L, et al. Major lower limb amputation–what, why and how to achieve the best results. Orthop Trauma. 2010;24:276-285. doi:10.1016/j.mporth.2010.03.017
Lu S, Wang C, Zhong W, et al. Amputation stump revision using a free sural neurocutaneous perforator flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:83-87. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000211
Kim SW, Jeon SB, Hwang KT, et al. Coverage of amputation stumps using a latissimus dorsi flap with a serratus anterior muscle flap: a comparative study. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:88-93. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000220
Pavey GJ, Formby PM, Hoyt BW, et al. Intrawound antibiotic powder decreases frequency of deep infection and severity of heterotopic ossification in combat lower extremity amputations. Clin Orthop. 2019;477:802-810. doi:10.1007/s11999.0000000000000090
Dunkel N, Belaieff W, Assal M, et al. Wound dehiscence and stump infection after lower limb amputation: risk factors and association with antibiotic use. J Orthop Sci Off J Jpn Orthop Assoc. 2012;17:588-594. doi:10.1007/s00776-012-0245-5
Rubin G, Orbach H, Rinott M, et al. The use of prophylactic antibiotics in treatment of fingertip amputation: a randomized prospective trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2015;33:645-647. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2015.02.002
Azarbal AF, Harris S, Mitchell EL, et al. Nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization is associated with increased wound occurrence after major lower extremity amputation. J Vasc Surg. 2015;62:401-405. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2015.02.052
Kwasniewski M, Mitchel D. Post amputation skin and wound care. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2022;33:857-870. doi:10.1016/j.pmr.2022.06.010
Chang H, Maldonado TS, Rockman CB, et al. Closed incision negative pressure wound therapy may decrease wound complications in major lower extremity amputations. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73:1041-1047. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.07.061
Kalliainen LK, Gordillo GM, Schlanger R, et al. Topical oxygen as an adjunct to wound healing: a clinical case series. Pathophysiol Off J Int Soc Pathophysiol. 2003;9:81-87. doi:10.1016/s0928-4680(02)00079-2
Reichmann JP, Stevens PM, Rheinstein J, et al. Removable rigid dressings for postoperative management of transtibial amputations: a review of published evidence. PM R. 2018;10:516-523. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.10.002
MacLean N, Fick GH. The effect of semirigid dressings on below-knee amputations. Phys Ther. 1994;74:668-673. doi:10.1093/ptj/74.7.668
Koonalinthip N, Sukthongsa A, Janchai S. Comparison of removable rigid dressing and elastic bandage for residual limb maturation in transtibial amputees: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101:1683-1688. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2020.05.009
Taylor L, Cavenett S, Stepien JM, et al. Removable rigid dressings: a retrospective case-note audit to determine the validity of post-amputation application. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2008;32:223-230. doi:10.1080/03093640802016795
Sumpio B, Shine SR, Mahler D, et al. A comparison of immediate postoperative rigid and soft dressings for below-knee amputations. Ann Vasc Surg. 2013;27:774-780. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2013.03.007
van Velzen AD, Nederhand MJ, Emmelot CH, et al. Early treatment of trans-tibial amputees: retrospective analysis of early fitting and elastic bandaging. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2005;29:3-12. doi:10.1080/17461550500069588
Chin T, Toda M. Results of prosthetic rehabilitation on managing transtibial vascular amputation with silicone liner after wound closure. J Int Med Res. 2016;44:957-967. doi:10.1177/0300060516647554
Hoskins RD, Sutton EE, Kinor D, et al. Using vacuum-assisted suspension to manage residual limb wounds in persons with transtibial amputation: a case series. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014;38:68-74. doi:10.1177/0309364613487547
Johannesson A, Larsson GU, Oberg T, et al. Comparison of vacuum-formed removable rigid dressing with conventional rigid dressing after transtibial amputation: similar outcome in a randomized controlled trial involving 27 patients. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:361-369. doi:10.1080/17453670710015265
Alsancak S, Köse SK, Altınkaynak H. Effect of elastic bandaging and prosthesis on the decrease in stump volume. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2011;45:14-22. doi:10.3944/AOTT.2011.2365
Than MP, Smith RA, Hammond C, et al. Keratin-based wound care products for treatment of resistant vascular wounds. J Clin Aesthetic Dermatol. 2012;5:31-35.
Gurtner GC, Garcia AD, Bakewell K, et al. A retrospective matched‐cohort study of 3994 lower extremity wounds of multiple etiologies across 644 institutions comparing a bioactive human skin allograft, TheraSkin, plus standard of care, to standard of care alone. Int Wound J. 2020;17:55-64. doi:10.1111/iwj.13231
Buikema KES, Meyerle JH. Amputation stump: privileged harbor for infections, tumors, and immune disorders. Clin Dermatol. 2014;32:670-677. doi:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2014.04.015
Yang NB, Garza LA, Foote CE, et al. High prevalence of stump dermatoses 38 years or more after amputation. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148:1283-1286. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2012.3004
Potter BK, Burns TC, Lacap AP, et al. Heterotopic ossification following traumatic and combat-related amputations. Prevalence, risk factors, and preliminary results of excision. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:476-486. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00412
Edwards DS, Kuhn KM, Potter BK, et al. Heterotopic ossification: a review of current understanding, treatment, and future. J Orthop Trauma. 2016;30(suppl 3):S27-S30. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000666
Tintle SM, Shawen SB, Forsberg JA, et al. Reoperation after combat-related major lower extremity amputations. J Orthop Trauma. 2014;28:232-237. doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182a53130
Bui KM, Raugi GJ, Nguyen VQ, et al. Skin problems in individuals with lower-limb loss: literature review and proposed classification system. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2009;46:1085-1090. doi:10.1682/jrrd.2009.04.0052
Turan H, Bas¸kan EB, Adim SB, et al. Acroangiodermatitis in a below-knee amputation stump. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2011;36:560-561. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2011.04037.x
Lin CH, Ma H, Chung MT, et al. Granulomatous cutaneous lesions associated with risperidone-induced hyperprolactinemia in an amputated upper limb. Int J Dermatol. 2012;51:75-78. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.04906.x
Schwartz RA, Bagley MP, Janniger CK, et al. Verrucous carcinoma of a leg amputation stump. Dermatologica. 1991;182:193-195. doi:10.1159/000247782
Campanati A, Diotallevi F, Radi G, et al. Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin B in focal hyperhidrosis: a narrative review. Toxins. 2023;15:147. doi:10.3390/toxins15020147
Anderson RR, Donelan MB, Hivnor C, et al. Laser treatment of traumatic scars with an emphasis on ablative fractional laser resurfacing: consensus report. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:187-193. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7761
McGrath M, McCarthy J, Gallego A, et al. The influence of perforated prosthetic liners on residual limb wound healing: a case report. Can Prosthet Orthot J. 2019;2:32723. doi:10.33137/cpoj.v2i1.32723
Abu El Hawa AA, Klein D, Bekeny JC, et al. The impact of statins on wound healing: an ally in treating the highly comorbid patient. J Wound Care. 2022;31(suppl 2):S36-S41. doi:10.12968/jowc.2022.31.Sup2.S36
Nasseri S, Sharifi M. Therapeutic potential of antimicrobial peptides for wound healing. Int J Pept Res Ther. 2022;28:38. doi:10.1007/s10989-021-10350-5
Lee JV, Engel C, Tay S, et al. N-Acetyl-Cysteine treatment after lower extremity amputation improves areas of perfusion defect and wound healing outcomes. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73:39-40. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.12.025
Dong Y, Yang Q, Sun X. Comprehensive analysis of cell therapy on chronic skin wound healing: a meta-analysis. Hum Gene Ther. 2021;32:787-795. doi:10.1089/hum.2020.275
References
Brockes JP, Kumar A. Comparative aspects of animal regeneration. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2008;24:525-549. doi:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.24.110707.175336
Eming SA, Hammerschmidt M, Krieg T, et al. Interrelation of immunity and tissue repair or regeneration. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2009;20:517-527. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2009.04.009
Eming SA. Evolution of immune pathways in regeneration and repair: recent concepts and translational perspectives. Semin Immunol. 2014;26:275-276. doi:10.1016/j.smim.2014.09.001
Wang PH, Huang BS, Horng HC, et al. Wound healing. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2018;81:94-101. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2017.11.002
Velnar T, Bailey T, Smrkolj V. The wound healing process: an overview of the cellular and molecular mechanisms. J Int Med Res. 2009;37:1528-1542. doi:10.1177/147323000903700531
Gurtner GC, Werner S, Barrandon Y, et al. Wound repair and regeneration. Nature. 2008;453:314-321. doi:10.1038/nature07039
Eming SA, Martin P, Tomic-Canic M. Wound repair and regeneration: mechanisms, signaling, and translation. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:265sr6. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3009337
Eming SA, Brachvogel B, Odorisio T, et al. Regulation of angiogenesis: wound healing as a model. Prog Histochem Cytochem. 2007;42:115-170. doi:10.1016/j.proghi.2007.06.001
Janis JE, Harrison B. Wound healing: part I. basic science. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(3 suppl):9S-17S. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000002773
Profyris C, Tziotzios C, Do Vale I. Cutaneous scarring: pathophysiology, molecular mechanisms, and scar reduction therapeutics. part I: the molecular basis of scar formation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;66:1-10; quiz 11-12. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2011.05.055
Kwan P, Ding J, Tredget EE. MicroRNA 181b regulates decorin production by dermal fibroblasts and may be a potential therapy for hypertrophic scar. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0123054. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0123054
Ben W, Yang Y, Yuan J, et al. Human papillomavirus 16 E6 modulates the expression of host microRNAs in cervical cancer. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;54:364-370. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2014.06.007
Yu EH, Tu HF, Wu CH, et al. MicroRNA-21 promotes perineural invasion and impacts survival in patients with oral carcinoma. J Chin Med Assoc JCMA. 2017;80:383-388. doi:10.1016/j.jcma.2017.01.003
Wen KC, Sung PL, Yen MS, et al. MicroRNAs regulate several functions of normal tissues and malignancies. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;52:465-469. doi:10.1016/j.tjog.2013.10.002
Babalola O, Mamalis A, Lev-Tov H, et al. The role of microRNAs in skin fibrosis. Arch Dermatol Res. 2013;305:763-776. doi:10.1007/s00403-013-1410-1
Hofer M, Hoferová Z, Falk M. Pharmacological modulation of radiation damage. does it exist a chance for other substances than hematopoietic growth factors and cytokines? Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18:1385. doi:10.3390/ijms18071385
Darby IA, Weller CD. Aspirin treatment for chronic wounds: potential beneficial and inhibitory effects. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25:7-12. doi:10.1111/wrr.12502
Khalid KA, Nawi AFM, Zulkifli N, et al. Aging and wound healing of the skin: a review of clinical and pathophysiological hallmarks. Life. 2022;12:2142. doi:10.3390/life12122142
Peacock HM, Gilbert EAB, Vickaryous MK. Scar‐free cutaneous wound healing in the leopard gecko, Eublepharis macularius. J Anat. 2015;227:596-610. doi:10.1111/joa.12368
Delorme SL, Lungu IM, Vickaryous MK. Scar‐free wound healing and regeneration following tail loss in the leopard gecko, Eublepharis macularius. Anat Rec. 2012;295:1575-1595. doi:10.1002/ar.22490
Brunauer R, Xia IG, Asrar SN, et al. Aging delays epimorphic regeneration in mice. J Gerontol Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021;76:1726-1733. doi:10.1093/gerona/glab131
Dolan CP, Yang TJ, Zimmel K, et al. Epimorphic regeneration of the mouse digit tip is finite. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2022;13:62. doi:10.1186/s13287-022-02741-2
Simkin J, Han M, Yu L, et al. The mouse digit tip: from wound healing to regeneration. Methods Mol Biol Clifton NJ. 2013;1037:419-435. doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-505-7_24
Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:422-429. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005
Dudek NL, Marks MB, Marshall SC, et al. Dermatologic conditions associated with use of a lower-extremity prosthesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:659-663. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2004.09.003
Lannan FM, Meyerle JH. The dermatologist’s role in amputee skin care. Cutis. 2019;103:86-90.
Dougherty AL, Mohrle CR, Galarneau MR, et al. Battlefield extremity injuries in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Injury. 2009;40:772-777. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2009.02.014
Epstein RA, Heinemann AW, McFarland LV. Quality of life for veterans and servicemembers with major traumatic limb loss from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47:373-385. doi:10.1682/jrrd.2009.03.0023
Pinzur MS, Gold J, Schwartz D, et al. Energy demands for walking in dysvascular amputees as related to the level of amputation. Orthopedics. 1992;15:1033-1036; discussion 1036-1037. doi:10.3928/0147-7447-19920901-07
Robinson V, Sansam K, Hirst L, et al. Major lower limb amputation–what, why and how to achieve the best results. Orthop Trauma. 2010;24:276-285. doi:10.1016/j.mporth.2010.03.017
Lu S, Wang C, Zhong W, et al. Amputation stump revision using a free sural neurocutaneous perforator flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:83-87. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000211
Kim SW, Jeon SB, Hwang KT, et al. Coverage of amputation stumps using a latissimus dorsi flap with a serratus anterior muscle flap: a comparative study. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:88-93. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000000220
Pavey GJ, Formby PM, Hoyt BW, et al. Intrawound antibiotic powder decreases frequency of deep infection and severity of heterotopic ossification in combat lower extremity amputations. Clin Orthop. 2019;477:802-810. doi:10.1007/s11999.0000000000000090
Dunkel N, Belaieff W, Assal M, et al. Wound dehiscence and stump infection after lower limb amputation: risk factors and association with antibiotic use. J Orthop Sci Off J Jpn Orthop Assoc. 2012;17:588-594. doi:10.1007/s00776-012-0245-5
Rubin G, Orbach H, Rinott M, et al. The use of prophylactic antibiotics in treatment of fingertip amputation: a randomized prospective trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2015;33:645-647. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2015.02.002
Azarbal AF, Harris S, Mitchell EL, et al. Nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization is associated with increased wound occurrence after major lower extremity amputation. J Vasc Surg. 2015;62:401-405. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2015.02.052
Kwasniewski M, Mitchel D. Post amputation skin and wound care. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2022;33:857-870. doi:10.1016/j.pmr.2022.06.010
Chang H, Maldonado TS, Rockman CB, et al. Closed incision negative pressure wound therapy may decrease wound complications in major lower extremity amputations. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73:1041-1047. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.07.061
Kalliainen LK, Gordillo GM, Schlanger R, et al. Topical oxygen as an adjunct to wound healing: a clinical case series. Pathophysiol Off J Int Soc Pathophysiol. 2003;9:81-87. doi:10.1016/s0928-4680(02)00079-2
Reichmann JP, Stevens PM, Rheinstein J, et al. Removable rigid dressings for postoperative management of transtibial amputations: a review of published evidence. PM R. 2018;10:516-523. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.10.002
MacLean N, Fick GH. The effect of semirigid dressings on below-knee amputations. Phys Ther. 1994;74:668-673. doi:10.1093/ptj/74.7.668
Koonalinthip N, Sukthongsa A, Janchai S. Comparison of removable rigid dressing and elastic bandage for residual limb maturation in transtibial amputees: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101:1683-1688. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2020.05.009
Taylor L, Cavenett S, Stepien JM, et al. Removable rigid dressings: a retrospective case-note audit to determine the validity of post-amputation application. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2008;32:223-230. doi:10.1080/03093640802016795
Sumpio B, Shine SR, Mahler D, et al. A comparison of immediate postoperative rigid and soft dressings for below-knee amputations. Ann Vasc Surg. 2013;27:774-780. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2013.03.007
van Velzen AD, Nederhand MJ, Emmelot CH, et al. Early treatment of trans-tibial amputees: retrospective analysis of early fitting and elastic bandaging. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2005;29:3-12. doi:10.1080/17461550500069588
Chin T, Toda M. Results of prosthetic rehabilitation on managing transtibial vascular amputation with silicone liner after wound closure. J Int Med Res. 2016;44:957-967. doi:10.1177/0300060516647554
Hoskins RD, Sutton EE, Kinor D, et al. Using vacuum-assisted suspension to manage residual limb wounds in persons with transtibial amputation: a case series. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014;38:68-74. doi:10.1177/0309364613487547
Johannesson A, Larsson GU, Oberg T, et al. Comparison of vacuum-formed removable rigid dressing with conventional rigid dressing after transtibial amputation: similar outcome in a randomized controlled trial involving 27 patients. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:361-369. doi:10.1080/17453670710015265
Alsancak S, Köse SK, Altınkaynak H. Effect of elastic bandaging and prosthesis on the decrease in stump volume. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2011;45:14-22. doi:10.3944/AOTT.2011.2365
Than MP, Smith RA, Hammond C, et al. Keratin-based wound care products for treatment of resistant vascular wounds. J Clin Aesthetic Dermatol. 2012;5:31-35.
Gurtner GC, Garcia AD, Bakewell K, et al. A retrospective matched‐cohort study of 3994 lower extremity wounds of multiple etiologies across 644 institutions comparing a bioactive human skin allograft, TheraSkin, plus standard of care, to standard of care alone. Int Wound J. 2020;17:55-64. doi:10.1111/iwj.13231
Buikema KES, Meyerle JH. Amputation stump: privileged harbor for infections, tumors, and immune disorders. Clin Dermatol. 2014;32:670-677. doi:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2014.04.015
Yang NB, Garza LA, Foote CE, et al. High prevalence of stump dermatoses 38 years or more after amputation. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148:1283-1286. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2012.3004
Potter BK, Burns TC, Lacap AP, et al. Heterotopic ossification following traumatic and combat-related amputations. Prevalence, risk factors, and preliminary results of excision. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:476-486. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00412
Edwards DS, Kuhn KM, Potter BK, et al. Heterotopic ossification: a review of current understanding, treatment, and future. J Orthop Trauma. 2016;30(suppl 3):S27-S30. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000666
Tintle SM, Shawen SB, Forsberg JA, et al. Reoperation after combat-related major lower extremity amputations. J Orthop Trauma. 2014;28:232-237. doi:10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182a53130
Bui KM, Raugi GJ, Nguyen VQ, et al. Skin problems in individuals with lower-limb loss: literature review and proposed classification system. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2009;46:1085-1090. doi:10.1682/jrrd.2009.04.0052
Turan H, Bas¸kan EB, Adim SB, et al. Acroangiodermatitis in a below-knee amputation stump. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2011;36:560-561. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2011.04037.x
Lin CH, Ma H, Chung MT, et al. Granulomatous cutaneous lesions associated with risperidone-induced hyperprolactinemia in an amputated upper limb. Int J Dermatol. 2012;51:75-78. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.04906.x
Schwartz RA, Bagley MP, Janniger CK, et al. Verrucous carcinoma of a leg amputation stump. Dermatologica. 1991;182:193-195. doi:10.1159/000247782
Campanati A, Diotallevi F, Radi G, et al. Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin B in focal hyperhidrosis: a narrative review. Toxins. 2023;15:147. doi:10.3390/toxins15020147
Anderson RR, Donelan MB, Hivnor C, et al. Laser treatment of traumatic scars with an emphasis on ablative fractional laser resurfacing: consensus report. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:187-193. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7761
McGrath M, McCarthy J, Gallego A, et al. The influence of perforated prosthetic liners on residual limb wound healing: a case report. Can Prosthet Orthot J. 2019;2:32723. doi:10.33137/cpoj.v2i1.32723
Abu El Hawa AA, Klein D, Bekeny JC, et al. The impact of statins on wound healing: an ally in treating the highly comorbid patient. J Wound Care. 2022;31(suppl 2):S36-S41. doi:10.12968/jowc.2022.31.Sup2.S36
Nasseri S, Sharifi M. Therapeutic potential of antimicrobial peptides for wound healing. Int J Pept Res Ther. 2022;28:38. doi:10.1007/s10989-021-10350-5
Lee JV, Engel C, Tay S, et al. N-Acetyl-Cysteine treatment after lower extremity amputation improves areas of perfusion defect and wound healing outcomes. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73:39-40. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.12.025
Dong Y, Yang Q, Sun X. Comprehensive analysis of cell therapy on chronic skin wound healing: a meta-analysis. Hum Gene Ther. 2021;32:787-795. doi:10.1089/hum.2020.275
Wound healing in adults is a complex dynamic process that usually takes the greater part of 1 year to completely resolve and is marked by the end of scar formation.
Postamputation residual limbs are subject to mechanical and biophysical stress to which the overlying skin is not accustomed. Skin treatment aims at mitigating these stresses.
The major dermatologic barriers to successful wound healing following amputation include infection, skin breakdown, formation of chronic wounds and granulation tissue, heterotopic ossification, and hyperhidrosis.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Consolidated Pubs: Do Not Show Source Publication Logo
Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is an increasingly common diagnosis, especially in middle-aged women, and was first described by Kossard1 in 1994. It is a variant of lichen planopilaris (LPP), a progressive scarring cicatricial alopecia that affects the frontotemporal area of the scalp, eyebrows, and sometimes even body hair.1 Although its etiology remains unclear, genetic causes, drugs, hormones, and environmental exposures—including certain chemicals found in sunscreens—have been implicated in its pathogenesis.2,3 An association between contact allergy to ingredients in personal care products and FFA diagnosis has been suggested; however, there is no evidence of causality to date. In this article, we highlight the potential relationship between contact allergy and FFA as well as clinical considerations for management.
Clinical Features and Diagnosis
Frontal fibrosing alopecia typically manifests with gradual symmetric recession of the frontal hairline leading to bandlike hair loss along the forehead, sometimes extending to the temporal region.4 Some patients may experience symptoms of scalp itching, burning, or tenderness that may precede or accompany the hair loss. Perifollicular erythema may be visible during the early stages and can be visualized on trichoscopy. The affected skin may appear pale and shiny and may have a smooth texture with a distinct lack of follicular openings. Aside from scalp involvement, other manifestations may include lichen planus pigmentosus, facial papules, body hair involvement, hypochromic lesions, diffuse redness on the face and neck, and prominent frontal veins.5 Although most FFA cases have characteristic clinical features and trichoscopic findings, biopsy for histopathologic examination is still recommended to confirm the diagnosis and ensure appropriate treatment.4 Classic histopathologic features include perifollicular lymphocytic inflammation, follicular destruction, and scarring.
Pathophysiology of FFA
The pathogenesis of FFA is thought to involve a variety of triggers, including immune-mediated inflammation, stress, genetics, hormones, and possibly environmental factors.6 Frontal fibrosing alopecia demonstrates considerable upregulation in cytotoxic helper T cells (TH1) and IFN-γ activity resulting in epithelial hair follicle stem cell apoptosis and replacement of normal epithelial tissue with fibrous tissue.7 There is some suspicion of genetic susceptibility in the onset of FFA as suggested by familial reports and genome-wide association studies.8-10 Hormonal and autoimmune factors also have been linked to FFA, including an increased risk for thyroid disease and the postmenopausal rise of androgen levels.6
Allergic Contact Dermatitis and FFA
Although they are 2 distinct conditions with differing etiologies, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and FFA may share environmental triggers, especially in susceptible individuals. This may support the coexistence and potential association between ACD and FFA.
In one case report, a woman who developed facial eczema followed by FFA showed positive patch tests to the UV filters drometrizole trisiloxane and ethylhexyl salicylate, which were listed as ingredients in her sunscreens. Avoidance of these allergens reportedly led to notable improvement of the symptoms.11 Case-control studies have found an association between the use of facial sunscreen and risk for FFA.12 A 2016 questionnaire that assessed a wide range of lifestyle, social, and medical factors related to FFA found that the use of sunscreens was significantly higher in patients with FFA than controls (P<.001), pointing to sunscreens as a potential contributing factor, but further research has been inconclusive. A higher frequency of positive patch tests to hydroperoxides of linalool and balsam of Peru (BoP) in patients with FFA have been documented; however, a direct cause cannot be established.2
In a 2020 prospective study conducted at multiple international centers, 65% (13/20) of FFA patients and 37.5% (9/24) of the control group had a positive patch test reaction to one or more allergens (P=.003). The most common allergens that were identified included cobalt chloride (positive in 35% [7/20] of patients with FFA), nickel sulfate (25% [5/20]), and potassium dichromate (15% [3/20]).13 In a recent 2-year cohort study of 42 patients with FFA who were referred for patch testing, the most common allergens included gallates, hydroperoxides of linalool, and other fragrances.14 After a 3-month period of allergen avoidance, 70% (29/42) of patients had decreased scalp erythema on examination, indicating that avoiding relevant allergens may reduce local inflammation. Furthermore, 76.2% (32/42) of patients with FFA showed delayed-type hypersensitivity to allergens found in daily personal care products such as shampoos, sunscreens, and moisturizers, among others.14 Notably, the study lacked a control group. A case-control study of 36 Hispanic women conducted in Mexico also resulted in 83.3% (15/18) of patients with FFA and 55.5% (10/18) of controls having at least 1 positive patch test; in the FFA group, these included iodopropynyl butylcarbamate (16.7% [3/18]) and propolis (16.7% [3/18]).15
Most recently, a retrospective study conducted by Shtaynberger et al16 included 12 patients with LPP or FFA diagnosed via clinical findings or biopsy. It also included an age- and temporally matched control group tested with identical allergens. Among the 12 patients who had FFA/LPP, all had at least 1 allergen identified on patch testing. The most common allergens identified were propolis (positive in 50% [6/12] of patients with FFA/LPP), fragrance mix I (16%), and methylisothiazolinone (16% [2/12]). Follow-up data were available for 9 of these patients, of whom 6 (66.7%) experienced symptom improvement after 6 months of allergen avoidance. Four (44.4%) patients experienced decreased follicular redness or scaling, 2 (22.2%) patients experienced improved scalp pain/itch, 2 (22.2%) patients had stable/improved hair density, and 1 (1.1%) patient had decreased hair shedding. Although this suggests an environmental trigger for FFA/LPP, the authors stated that changes in patient treatment plans could have contributed to their improvement. The study also was limited by its small size and its overall generalizability.16
These studies have underscored the significance of patch testing in individuals diagnosed with FFA and have identified common allergens prevalent in this patient population. They have suggested that patients with FFA are more likely to have positive patch tests, and in some cases patients could experience improvements in scalp pruritus and erythema with allergen avoidance; however, we emphasize that a causal association between contact allergy and FFA remains unproven to date.
Most Common Allergens Pertinent to FFA
Preservatives—In some studies, patients with FFA have had positive patch tests to preservatives such as gallates and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI).14 Gallates are antioxidants that are used in food preservation, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics due to their ability to inhibit oxidation and rancidity of fats and oils.17 The most common gallates include propyl gallate, octyl gallate, and dodecyl gallate. Propyl gallate is utilized in some waxy or oily cosmetics and personal care items including sunscreens, shampoos, conditioners, bar soaps, facial cleansers, and moisturizers.18 Typically, if patients have a positive patch test to one gallate, they should be advised to avoid all gallate compounds, as they can cross-react.
Similarly, MCI/MI can prevent product degradation through their antibacterial and antifungal properties. This combination of MCI and MI is used as an effective method of prolonging the shelf life of cosmetic products and commonly is found in sunscreens, facial moisturizing creams, shampoos, and conditioners19; it is banned from use in leave-on products in the European Union and Canada due to increased rates of contact allergy.20 In patients with FFA who commonly use facial sunscreen, preservatives can be a potential allergen exposure to consider.
Iodopropynyl butylcarbamate also is a preservative used in cosmetic formulations. Similar to MCI/MI, it is a potent fungicide and bactericide. This allergen can be found in hair care products, bodywashes, and other personal products.21
UV Light–Absorbing Agents—A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted in 2022 showed a significant (P<.001) association between sunscreen use and FFA.22 A majority of allergens identified on patch testing included UVA- and UVB-absorbing agents found in sunscreens and other products including cosmetics,11,12 such as drometrizole trisiloxane, ethylhexyl salicylate, avobenzone, and benzophenone-4. Drometrizole trisiloxane is a photostabilizer and a broad-spectrum UV filter that is not approved for use in sunscreens in the United States.23 It also is effective in stabilizing and preventing the degradation of avobenzone, a commonly used UVA filter.24
Fragrances—Fragrances are present in nearly every personal and cosmetic product, sometimes even in those advertised as being “fragrance free.” Hydroperoxides of linalool, BoP, and fragrance mix are common allergens that are found in a variety of personal care products including perfumes, cosmetics, and even household cleaning supplies.25 Simultaneous positive patch tests to BoP and fragrance mix are common due to shared components. Linalool can be found in various plants such as lavender, rose, bergamot, and jasmine.26 Upon air exposure, linalool auto-oxidizes to form allergenic hydroperoxides of linalool. Among patients with FFA, positive patch test reactions to fragrance chemicals are common and could be attributed to the use of fragranced hair products and facial cosmetics.
Hair Dyes and Bleaches—Allergic reactions to hair dyes and bleaches can result in severe ACD of the head/neck and, in rare cases, scarring alopecia.27 Chemicals found in these products include paraphenylenediamine (PPD) and ammonium persulfate. The most common hair dye allergen, PPD also is used in some rubbers and plastics. Ammonium persulfate is a chemical used in hair bleaches and to deodorize oils. One case study reported a patient with FFA who developed chemically induced vitiligo immediately after the use of a hair color product that contained PPD.28 However, without patch testing to confirm the presence of contact allergy, other patient-specific and environmental risk factors could have contributed to FFA in this case.
A Knot in the Truth
In this endeavor to untangle the truth, it should be remembered that at the time of writing, the purported association between FFA and ACD remains debatable. Contact dermatitis specialists have voiced that the association between FFA and ACD, especially with regard to sunscreen, cannot be supported due to the lack of sufficient evidence.29 A large majority of the research conducted on FFA and ACD is based on case reports and studies limited to a small sample size, and most of these patch test studies lack a control group. Felmingham et al30 noted that the recent epidemiology of FFA aligns with increased sunscreen use. They also highlighted the limitations of the aforementioned studies, which include misclassification of exposures in the control group2 and recall bias in questionnaire participants.2,12 The most pressing limitation that permeates through most of these studies is the temporal ambiguity associated with sunscreen use. A study by Dhana et al31 failed to specify whether increased sunscreen use preceded the diagnosis of FFA or if it stems from the need to protect more exposed skin as a consequence of disease. Broad sunscreen avoidance due to concern for a possible association with hair loss could have detrimental health implications by increasing the risk for photodamage and skin cancer.
FFA Patch Testing
The avoidance of pertinent allergens could be effective in reducing local inflammation, pruritus, and erythema in FFA.9,14,32 At our institution, we selectively patch test patients with FFA when there is a suspected contact allergy. Clinical features that may allude to a potential contact allergy include an erythematous or eczematous dermatitis or symptoms of pruritus along the scalp or eyebrows. If patients recall hair loss or symptoms after using a hair or facial product, then a potential contact allergy to these products could be considered. Patch testing in patients with FFA includes the North American 80 Comprehensive Series and the cosmetic and hairdresser supplemental series, as well as an additional customized panel of 8 allergens as determined by patch testing experts at the University of Massachusetts, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Massachusetts General Hospital (private email communication, November 2017). Patch test readings are performed at 48 and 96 or 120 hours. Using the American Contact Dermatitis Society’s Contact Allergen Management Program, patients are provided personalized safe product lists and avoidance strategies are discussed.
Final Interpretation
In a world where cosmetic products are ubiquitous, it is hard to define the potential role of contact allergens in the entangled pathogenesis of FFA and ACD. As evidenced by emerging literature that correlates the 2 conditions and their exacerbating factors, it is important for physicians to have a comprehensive diagnostic approach and heightened awareness for potential allergens at play in FFA (Table). The identification of certain chemicals and preservatives as potential triggers for FFA should emphasize the importance of patch testing in these patients; however, whether the positive reactions are relevant to the pathogenesis or disease course of FFA still is unknown. While these findings begin to unravel the intertwined causes of FFA and ACD, further research encompassing larger cohorts and prospective studies is imperative to solidify these associations, define concrete guidelines, and improve patient outcomes.
References
Kossard S. Postmenopausal frontal fibrosing alopecia: scarring alopecia in a pattern distribution. Arch Dermatol. 1994;130:770-774. doi:10.1001/archderm.1994.01690060100013
Aldoori N, Dobson K, Holden CR, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia: possible association with leave-on facial skin care products and sunscreens; a questionnaire study. Br J Dermatol. 2016;175:762-767. doi:10.1111/bjd.14535
Debroy Kidambi A, Dobson K, Holmes S, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia in men: an association with facial moisturizers and sunscreens. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:260-261. doi:10.1111/bjd.15311
Starace M, Orlando G, Iorizzo M, et al. Clinical and dermoscopic approaches to diagnosis of frontal fibrosing alopecia: results from a multicenter study of the International Dermoscopy Society. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2022;12:E2022080. doi:10.5826/dpc.1201a80
Fechine COC, Valente NYS, Romiti R. Lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia: review and update of diagnostic and therapeutic features. An Bras Dermatol. 2022;97:348-357. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.08.008
Frontal fibrosing alopecia: a review of disease pathogenesis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:911944. doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.911944
Del Duca E, Ruano Ruiz J, Pavel AB, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia shows robust T helper 1 and Janus kinase 3 skewing. Br J Dermatol. 2020;183:1083-1093. doi:10.1111/bjd.19040
Tziotzios C, Petridis C, Dand N, et al. Genome-wide association study in frontal fibrosing alopecia identifies four susceptibility loci including HLA-B*07:02. Nat Commun. 2019;10:1150. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09117-w
Navarro‐Belmonte MR, Navarro‐López V, Ramírez‐Boscà A, et al. Case series of familial frontal fibrosing alopecia and a review of the literature. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2015;14:64-69. doi:10.1111/jocd.12125
Cuenca-Barrales C, Ruiz-Villaverde R, Molina-Leyva A. Familial frontal fibrosing alopecia. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2021;21:E320-E323. doi:10.18295/squmj.2021.21.02.025
Pastor-Nieto MA, Gatica-Ortega ME. Allergic contact dermatitis to drometrizole trisiloxane in a woman thereafter diagnosed with frontal fibrosing alopecia. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;89:215-217. doi:10.1111/cod.14370
Moreno-Arrones OM, Saceda-Corralo D, Rodrigues-Barata AR, et al. Risk factors associated with frontal fibrosing alopecia: a multicentre case–control study. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2019;44:404-410. doi:10.1111/ced.13785
Rudnicka L, Rokni GR, Lotti T, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis in patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia: an international multi-center study. Dermatol Ther. 2020;33:E13560. doi:10.1111/dth.13560
Prasad S, Marks DH, Burns LJ, et al. Patch testing and contact allergen avoidance in patients with lichen planopilaris and/or frontal fibrosing alopecia: a cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:659-661. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.01.026
Ocampo-Garza SS, Herz-Ruelas ME, Chavez-Alvarez S, et al. Association of frontal fibrosing alopecia and contact allergens in everyday skincare products in Hispanic females: a case-control study. An Bras Dermatol. 2021;96:776-778. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2020.09.013
Shtaynberger B, Bruder P, Zippin JH. The prevalence of type iv hypersensitivity in patients with lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia. Dermatitis. 2023;34:351-352. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000965
Kahkeshani N, Farzaei F, Fotouhi M, et al. Pharmacological effects of gallic acid in health and diseases: a mechanistic review. Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2019;22:225-237. doi:10.22038/ijbms.2019.32806.7897
Holcomb ZE, Van Noord MG, Atwater AR. Gallate contact dermatitis: product update and systematic review. Dermatitis. 2017;28:115-127. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000263
Gorris A, Valencak J, Schremser V, et al. Contact allergy to methylisothiazolinone with three clinical presentations in one patient. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;82:162-164. doi:10.1111/cod.13384
Uter W, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, et al. The epidemic of methylisothiazolinone contact allergy in Europe: follow-up on changing exposures. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:333-339. doi:10.1111/jdv.15875
Batista M, Morgado F, Gonçalo M. Patch test reactivity to iodopropynyl butylcarbamate in consecutive patients during a period of 7 years. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81:54-55. doi:10.1111/cod.13213
Maghfour J, Ceresnie M, Olson J, et al. The association between frontal fibrosing alopecia, sunscreen, and moisturizers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;87:395-396. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.12.058
Hughes TM, Martin JA, Lewis VJ, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to drometrizole trisiloxane in a sunscreen with concomitant sensitivities to other sunscreens. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52:226-227. doi:10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.0566a.x
de Groot AC. Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru)—a critical review of the literature and assessment of the significance of positive patch test reactions and the usefulness of restrictive diets. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80:335-353. doi:10.1111/cod.13263
Sköld M, Börje A, Matura M, et al. Studies on the autoxidation and sensitizing capacity of the fragrance chemical linalool, identifying a linalool hydroperoxide. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;46:267-272. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.460504.x
Dev T, Khan E, Patel U, et al. Cicatricial alopecia following allergic contact dermatitis from hair dyes: a rare clinical presentation. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;86:59-61. doi:10.1111/cod.13974
De Souza B, Burns L, Senna MM. Frontal fibrosing alopecia preceding the development of vitiligo: a case report. JAAD Case Rep. 2020;6:154-155. doi:10.1016/j.jdcr.2019.12.011
Abuav R, Shon W. Are sunscreen particles involved in frontal fibrosing alopecia?—a TEM-EDXS analysis on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded alopecia biopsies (pilot study). Am J Dermatopathol. 2022;44:E135. doi:10.1097/DAD.0000000000002317
Felmingham C, Yip L, Tam M, et al. Allergy to sunscreen and leave-on facial products is not a likely causative mechanism in frontal fibrosing alopecia: perspective from contact allergy experts. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:481-482. doi:10.1111/bjd.18380
Dhana A, Gumedze F, Khumalo N. Regarding “frontal fibrosing alopecia: possible association with leave-on facial skincare products and sunscreens; a questionnaire study.” Br J Dermatol. 2016;176:836-837. doi:10.1111/bjd.15197
Pastor-Nieto MA, Gatica-Ortega ME, Sánchez-Herreros C, et al. Sensitization to benzyl salicylate and other allergens in patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;84:423-430. doi:10.1111/cod.13763
Rocha VB, Donati A, Contin LA, et al. Photopatch and patch testing in 63 patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia: a case series. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179:1402-1403. doi:10.1111/bjd.16933
Shaina E. George is from the CUNY School of Medicine, New York, New York. Shaina E. George also is from and Dr. Yu is from the Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Ivan Rodriguez and Dr. Adler are from the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. Dr. Adler is from the Department of Dermatology.
Shaina E. George and Ivan Rodriguez report no conflict of interest. Dr. Adler has received research grants from AbbVie, the American Contact Dermatitis Society, and Dermavant. He also is a member of the Board of Directors for the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Dr. Yu has served as a speaker for the National Eczema Association; has received research grants from the Dermatology Foundation and the Pediatric Dermatology Research Association; and has been an employee of Arcutis, Dynamed, Incyte, O'Glacee, Sanofi, and SmartPractice. He also is the Director and President-Elect of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.
Correspondence: JiaDe Yu, MD, MS, Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford St, Ste 200, Boston, MA 02114 (jiade.yu@mgh.harvard.edu).
Shaina E. George is from the CUNY School of Medicine, New York, New York. Shaina E. George also is from and Dr. Yu is from the Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Ivan Rodriguez and Dr. Adler are from the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. Dr. Adler is from the Department of Dermatology.
Shaina E. George and Ivan Rodriguez report no conflict of interest. Dr. Adler has received research grants from AbbVie, the American Contact Dermatitis Society, and Dermavant. He also is a member of the Board of Directors for the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Dr. Yu has served as a speaker for the National Eczema Association; has received research grants from the Dermatology Foundation and the Pediatric Dermatology Research Association; and has been an employee of Arcutis, Dynamed, Incyte, O'Glacee, Sanofi, and SmartPractice. He also is the Director and President-Elect of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.
Correspondence: JiaDe Yu, MD, MS, Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford St, Ste 200, Boston, MA 02114 (jiade.yu@mgh.harvard.edu).
Author and Disclosure Information
Shaina E. George is from the CUNY School of Medicine, New York, New York. Shaina E. George also is from and Dr. Yu is from the Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Ivan Rodriguez and Dr. Adler are from the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. Dr. Adler is from the Department of Dermatology.
Shaina E. George and Ivan Rodriguez report no conflict of interest. Dr. Adler has received research grants from AbbVie, the American Contact Dermatitis Society, and Dermavant. He also is a member of the Board of Directors for the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Dr. Yu has served as a speaker for the National Eczema Association; has received research grants from the Dermatology Foundation and the Pediatric Dermatology Research Association; and has been an employee of Arcutis, Dynamed, Incyte, O'Glacee, Sanofi, and SmartPractice. He also is the Director and President-Elect of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.
Correspondence: JiaDe Yu, MD, MS, Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford St, Ste 200, Boston, MA 02114 (jiade.yu@mgh.harvard.edu).
Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is an increasingly common diagnosis, especially in middle-aged women, and was first described by Kossard1 in 1994. It is a variant of lichen planopilaris (LPP), a progressive scarring cicatricial alopecia that affects the frontotemporal area of the scalp, eyebrows, and sometimes even body hair.1 Although its etiology remains unclear, genetic causes, drugs, hormones, and environmental exposures—including certain chemicals found in sunscreens—have been implicated in its pathogenesis.2,3 An association between contact allergy to ingredients in personal care products and FFA diagnosis has been suggested; however, there is no evidence of causality to date. In this article, we highlight the potential relationship between contact allergy and FFA as well as clinical considerations for management.
Clinical Features and Diagnosis
Frontal fibrosing alopecia typically manifests with gradual symmetric recession of the frontal hairline leading to bandlike hair loss along the forehead, sometimes extending to the temporal region.4 Some patients may experience symptoms of scalp itching, burning, or tenderness that may precede or accompany the hair loss. Perifollicular erythema may be visible during the early stages and can be visualized on trichoscopy. The affected skin may appear pale and shiny and may have a smooth texture with a distinct lack of follicular openings. Aside from scalp involvement, other manifestations may include lichen planus pigmentosus, facial papules, body hair involvement, hypochromic lesions, diffuse redness on the face and neck, and prominent frontal veins.5 Although most FFA cases have characteristic clinical features and trichoscopic findings, biopsy for histopathologic examination is still recommended to confirm the diagnosis and ensure appropriate treatment.4 Classic histopathologic features include perifollicular lymphocytic inflammation, follicular destruction, and scarring.
Pathophysiology of FFA
The pathogenesis of FFA is thought to involve a variety of triggers, including immune-mediated inflammation, stress, genetics, hormones, and possibly environmental factors.6 Frontal fibrosing alopecia demonstrates considerable upregulation in cytotoxic helper T cells (TH1) and IFN-γ activity resulting in epithelial hair follicle stem cell apoptosis and replacement of normal epithelial tissue with fibrous tissue.7 There is some suspicion of genetic susceptibility in the onset of FFA as suggested by familial reports and genome-wide association studies.8-10 Hormonal and autoimmune factors also have been linked to FFA, including an increased risk for thyroid disease and the postmenopausal rise of androgen levels.6
Allergic Contact Dermatitis and FFA
Although they are 2 distinct conditions with differing etiologies, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and FFA may share environmental triggers, especially in susceptible individuals. This may support the coexistence and potential association between ACD and FFA.
In one case report, a woman who developed facial eczema followed by FFA showed positive patch tests to the UV filters drometrizole trisiloxane and ethylhexyl salicylate, which were listed as ingredients in her sunscreens. Avoidance of these allergens reportedly led to notable improvement of the symptoms.11 Case-control studies have found an association between the use of facial sunscreen and risk for FFA.12 A 2016 questionnaire that assessed a wide range of lifestyle, social, and medical factors related to FFA found that the use of sunscreens was significantly higher in patients with FFA than controls (P<.001), pointing to sunscreens as a potential contributing factor, but further research has been inconclusive. A higher frequency of positive patch tests to hydroperoxides of linalool and balsam of Peru (BoP) in patients with FFA have been documented; however, a direct cause cannot be established.2
In a 2020 prospective study conducted at multiple international centers, 65% (13/20) of FFA patients and 37.5% (9/24) of the control group had a positive patch test reaction to one or more allergens (P=.003). The most common allergens that were identified included cobalt chloride (positive in 35% [7/20] of patients with FFA), nickel sulfate (25% [5/20]), and potassium dichromate (15% [3/20]).13 In a recent 2-year cohort study of 42 patients with FFA who were referred for patch testing, the most common allergens included gallates, hydroperoxides of linalool, and other fragrances.14 After a 3-month period of allergen avoidance, 70% (29/42) of patients had decreased scalp erythema on examination, indicating that avoiding relevant allergens may reduce local inflammation. Furthermore, 76.2% (32/42) of patients with FFA showed delayed-type hypersensitivity to allergens found in daily personal care products such as shampoos, sunscreens, and moisturizers, among others.14 Notably, the study lacked a control group. A case-control study of 36 Hispanic women conducted in Mexico also resulted in 83.3% (15/18) of patients with FFA and 55.5% (10/18) of controls having at least 1 positive patch test; in the FFA group, these included iodopropynyl butylcarbamate (16.7% [3/18]) and propolis (16.7% [3/18]).15
Most recently, a retrospective study conducted by Shtaynberger et al16 included 12 patients with LPP or FFA diagnosed via clinical findings or biopsy. It also included an age- and temporally matched control group tested with identical allergens. Among the 12 patients who had FFA/LPP, all had at least 1 allergen identified on patch testing. The most common allergens identified were propolis (positive in 50% [6/12] of patients with FFA/LPP), fragrance mix I (16%), and methylisothiazolinone (16% [2/12]). Follow-up data were available for 9 of these patients, of whom 6 (66.7%) experienced symptom improvement after 6 months of allergen avoidance. Four (44.4%) patients experienced decreased follicular redness or scaling, 2 (22.2%) patients experienced improved scalp pain/itch, 2 (22.2%) patients had stable/improved hair density, and 1 (1.1%) patient had decreased hair shedding. Although this suggests an environmental trigger for FFA/LPP, the authors stated that changes in patient treatment plans could have contributed to their improvement. The study also was limited by its small size and its overall generalizability.16
These studies have underscored the significance of patch testing in individuals diagnosed with FFA and have identified common allergens prevalent in this patient population. They have suggested that patients with FFA are more likely to have positive patch tests, and in some cases patients could experience improvements in scalp pruritus and erythema with allergen avoidance; however, we emphasize that a causal association between contact allergy and FFA remains unproven to date.
Most Common Allergens Pertinent to FFA
Preservatives—In some studies, patients with FFA have had positive patch tests to preservatives such as gallates and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI).14 Gallates are antioxidants that are used in food preservation, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics due to their ability to inhibit oxidation and rancidity of fats and oils.17 The most common gallates include propyl gallate, octyl gallate, and dodecyl gallate. Propyl gallate is utilized in some waxy or oily cosmetics and personal care items including sunscreens, shampoos, conditioners, bar soaps, facial cleansers, and moisturizers.18 Typically, if patients have a positive patch test to one gallate, they should be advised to avoid all gallate compounds, as they can cross-react.
Similarly, MCI/MI can prevent product degradation through their antibacterial and antifungal properties. This combination of MCI and MI is used as an effective method of prolonging the shelf life of cosmetic products and commonly is found in sunscreens, facial moisturizing creams, shampoos, and conditioners19; it is banned from use in leave-on products in the European Union and Canada due to increased rates of contact allergy.20 In patients with FFA who commonly use facial sunscreen, preservatives can be a potential allergen exposure to consider.
Iodopropynyl butylcarbamate also is a preservative used in cosmetic formulations. Similar to MCI/MI, it is a potent fungicide and bactericide. This allergen can be found in hair care products, bodywashes, and other personal products.21
UV Light–Absorbing Agents—A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted in 2022 showed a significant (P<.001) association between sunscreen use and FFA.22 A majority of allergens identified on patch testing included UVA- and UVB-absorbing agents found in sunscreens and other products including cosmetics,11,12 such as drometrizole trisiloxane, ethylhexyl salicylate, avobenzone, and benzophenone-4. Drometrizole trisiloxane is a photostabilizer and a broad-spectrum UV filter that is not approved for use in sunscreens in the United States.23 It also is effective in stabilizing and preventing the degradation of avobenzone, a commonly used UVA filter.24
Fragrances—Fragrances are present in nearly every personal and cosmetic product, sometimes even in those advertised as being “fragrance free.” Hydroperoxides of linalool, BoP, and fragrance mix are common allergens that are found in a variety of personal care products including perfumes, cosmetics, and even household cleaning supplies.25 Simultaneous positive patch tests to BoP and fragrance mix are common due to shared components. Linalool can be found in various plants such as lavender, rose, bergamot, and jasmine.26 Upon air exposure, linalool auto-oxidizes to form allergenic hydroperoxides of linalool. Among patients with FFA, positive patch test reactions to fragrance chemicals are common and could be attributed to the use of fragranced hair products and facial cosmetics.
Hair Dyes and Bleaches—Allergic reactions to hair dyes and bleaches can result in severe ACD of the head/neck and, in rare cases, scarring alopecia.27 Chemicals found in these products include paraphenylenediamine (PPD) and ammonium persulfate. The most common hair dye allergen, PPD also is used in some rubbers and plastics. Ammonium persulfate is a chemical used in hair bleaches and to deodorize oils. One case study reported a patient with FFA who developed chemically induced vitiligo immediately after the use of a hair color product that contained PPD.28 However, without patch testing to confirm the presence of contact allergy, other patient-specific and environmental risk factors could have contributed to FFA in this case.
A Knot in the Truth
In this endeavor to untangle the truth, it should be remembered that at the time of writing, the purported association between FFA and ACD remains debatable. Contact dermatitis specialists have voiced that the association between FFA and ACD, especially with regard to sunscreen, cannot be supported due to the lack of sufficient evidence.29 A large majority of the research conducted on FFA and ACD is based on case reports and studies limited to a small sample size, and most of these patch test studies lack a control group. Felmingham et al30 noted that the recent epidemiology of FFA aligns with increased sunscreen use. They also highlighted the limitations of the aforementioned studies, which include misclassification of exposures in the control group2 and recall bias in questionnaire participants.2,12 The most pressing limitation that permeates through most of these studies is the temporal ambiguity associated with sunscreen use. A study by Dhana et al31 failed to specify whether increased sunscreen use preceded the diagnosis of FFA or if it stems from the need to protect more exposed skin as a consequence of disease. Broad sunscreen avoidance due to concern for a possible association with hair loss could have detrimental health implications by increasing the risk for photodamage and skin cancer.
FFA Patch Testing
The avoidance of pertinent allergens could be effective in reducing local inflammation, pruritus, and erythema in FFA.9,14,32 At our institution, we selectively patch test patients with FFA when there is a suspected contact allergy. Clinical features that may allude to a potential contact allergy include an erythematous or eczematous dermatitis or symptoms of pruritus along the scalp or eyebrows. If patients recall hair loss or symptoms after using a hair or facial product, then a potential contact allergy to these products could be considered. Patch testing in patients with FFA includes the North American 80 Comprehensive Series and the cosmetic and hairdresser supplemental series, as well as an additional customized panel of 8 allergens as determined by patch testing experts at the University of Massachusetts, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Massachusetts General Hospital (private email communication, November 2017). Patch test readings are performed at 48 and 96 or 120 hours. Using the American Contact Dermatitis Society’s Contact Allergen Management Program, patients are provided personalized safe product lists and avoidance strategies are discussed.
Final Interpretation
In a world where cosmetic products are ubiquitous, it is hard to define the potential role of contact allergens in the entangled pathogenesis of FFA and ACD. As evidenced by emerging literature that correlates the 2 conditions and their exacerbating factors, it is important for physicians to have a comprehensive diagnostic approach and heightened awareness for potential allergens at play in FFA (Table). The identification of certain chemicals and preservatives as potential triggers for FFA should emphasize the importance of patch testing in these patients; however, whether the positive reactions are relevant to the pathogenesis or disease course of FFA still is unknown. While these findings begin to unravel the intertwined causes of FFA and ACD, further research encompassing larger cohorts and prospective studies is imperative to solidify these associations, define concrete guidelines, and improve patient outcomes.
Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is an increasingly common diagnosis, especially in middle-aged women, and was first described by Kossard1 in 1994. It is a variant of lichen planopilaris (LPP), a progressive scarring cicatricial alopecia that affects the frontotemporal area of the scalp, eyebrows, and sometimes even body hair.1 Although its etiology remains unclear, genetic causes, drugs, hormones, and environmental exposures—including certain chemicals found in sunscreens—have been implicated in its pathogenesis.2,3 An association between contact allergy to ingredients in personal care products and FFA diagnosis has been suggested; however, there is no evidence of causality to date. In this article, we highlight the potential relationship between contact allergy and FFA as well as clinical considerations for management.
Clinical Features and Diagnosis
Frontal fibrosing alopecia typically manifests with gradual symmetric recession of the frontal hairline leading to bandlike hair loss along the forehead, sometimes extending to the temporal region.4 Some patients may experience symptoms of scalp itching, burning, or tenderness that may precede or accompany the hair loss. Perifollicular erythema may be visible during the early stages and can be visualized on trichoscopy. The affected skin may appear pale and shiny and may have a smooth texture with a distinct lack of follicular openings. Aside from scalp involvement, other manifestations may include lichen planus pigmentosus, facial papules, body hair involvement, hypochromic lesions, diffuse redness on the face and neck, and prominent frontal veins.5 Although most FFA cases have characteristic clinical features and trichoscopic findings, biopsy for histopathologic examination is still recommended to confirm the diagnosis and ensure appropriate treatment.4 Classic histopathologic features include perifollicular lymphocytic inflammation, follicular destruction, and scarring.
Pathophysiology of FFA
The pathogenesis of FFA is thought to involve a variety of triggers, including immune-mediated inflammation, stress, genetics, hormones, and possibly environmental factors.6 Frontal fibrosing alopecia demonstrates considerable upregulation in cytotoxic helper T cells (TH1) and IFN-γ activity resulting in epithelial hair follicle stem cell apoptosis and replacement of normal epithelial tissue with fibrous tissue.7 There is some suspicion of genetic susceptibility in the onset of FFA as suggested by familial reports and genome-wide association studies.8-10 Hormonal and autoimmune factors also have been linked to FFA, including an increased risk for thyroid disease and the postmenopausal rise of androgen levels.6
Allergic Contact Dermatitis and FFA
Although they are 2 distinct conditions with differing etiologies, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and FFA may share environmental triggers, especially in susceptible individuals. This may support the coexistence and potential association between ACD and FFA.
In one case report, a woman who developed facial eczema followed by FFA showed positive patch tests to the UV filters drometrizole trisiloxane and ethylhexyl salicylate, which were listed as ingredients in her sunscreens. Avoidance of these allergens reportedly led to notable improvement of the symptoms.11 Case-control studies have found an association between the use of facial sunscreen and risk for FFA.12 A 2016 questionnaire that assessed a wide range of lifestyle, social, and medical factors related to FFA found that the use of sunscreens was significantly higher in patients with FFA than controls (P<.001), pointing to sunscreens as a potential contributing factor, but further research has been inconclusive. A higher frequency of positive patch tests to hydroperoxides of linalool and balsam of Peru (BoP) in patients with FFA have been documented; however, a direct cause cannot be established.2
In a 2020 prospective study conducted at multiple international centers, 65% (13/20) of FFA patients and 37.5% (9/24) of the control group had a positive patch test reaction to one or more allergens (P=.003). The most common allergens that were identified included cobalt chloride (positive in 35% [7/20] of patients with FFA), nickel sulfate (25% [5/20]), and potassium dichromate (15% [3/20]).13 In a recent 2-year cohort study of 42 patients with FFA who were referred for patch testing, the most common allergens included gallates, hydroperoxides of linalool, and other fragrances.14 After a 3-month period of allergen avoidance, 70% (29/42) of patients had decreased scalp erythema on examination, indicating that avoiding relevant allergens may reduce local inflammation. Furthermore, 76.2% (32/42) of patients with FFA showed delayed-type hypersensitivity to allergens found in daily personal care products such as shampoos, sunscreens, and moisturizers, among others.14 Notably, the study lacked a control group. A case-control study of 36 Hispanic women conducted in Mexico also resulted in 83.3% (15/18) of patients with FFA and 55.5% (10/18) of controls having at least 1 positive patch test; in the FFA group, these included iodopropynyl butylcarbamate (16.7% [3/18]) and propolis (16.7% [3/18]).15
Most recently, a retrospective study conducted by Shtaynberger et al16 included 12 patients with LPP or FFA diagnosed via clinical findings or biopsy. It also included an age- and temporally matched control group tested with identical allergens. Among the 12 patients who had FFA/LPP, all had at least 1 allergen identified on patch testing. The most common allergens identified were propolis (positive in 50% [6/12] of patients with FFA/LPP), fragrance mix I (16%), and methylisothiazolinone (16% [2/12]). Follow-up data were available for 9 of these patients, of whom 6 (66.7%) experienced symptom improvement after 6 months of allergen avoidance. Four (44.4%) patients experienced decreased follicular redness or scaling, 2 (22.2%) patients experienced improved scalp pain/itch, 2 (22.2%) patients had stable/improved hair density, and 1 (1.1%) patient had decreased hair shedding. Although this suggests an environmental trigger for FFA/LPP, the authors stated that changes in patient treatment plans could have contributed to their improvement. The study also was limited by its small size and its overall generalizability.16
These studies have underscored the significance of patch testing in individuals diagnosed with FFA and have identified common allergens prevalent in this patient population. They have suggested that patients with FFA are more likely to have positive patch tests, and in some cases patients could experience improvements in scalp pruritus and erythema with allergen avoidance; however, we emphasize that a causal association between contact allergy and FFA remains unproven to date.
Most Common Allergens Pertinent to FFA
Preservatives—In some studies, patients with FFA have had positive patch tests to preservatives such as gallates and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI).14 Gallates are antioxidants that are used in food preservation, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics due to their ability to inhibit oxidation and rancidity of fats and oils.17 The most common gallates include propyl gallate, octyl gallate, and dodecyl gallate. Propyl gallate is utilized in some waxy or oily cosmetics and personal care items including sunscreens, shampoos, conditioners, bar soaps, facial cleansers, and moisturizers.18 Typically, if patients have a positive patch test to one gallate, they should be advised to avoid all gallate compounds, as they can cross-react.
Similarly, MCI/MI can prevent product degradation through their antibacterial and antifungal properties. This combination of MCI and MI is used as an effective method of prolonging the shelf life of cosmetic products and commonly is found in sunscreens, facial moisturizing creams, shampoos, and conditioners19; it is banned from use in leave-on products in the European Union and Canada due to increased rates of contact allergy.20 In patients with FFA who commonly use facial sunscreen, preservatives can be a potential allergen exposure to consider.
Iodopropynyl butylcarbamate also is a preservative used in cosmetic formulations. Similar to MCI/MI, it is a potent fungicide and bactericide. This allergen can be found in hair care products, bodywashes, and other personal products.21
UV Light–Absorbing Agents—A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted in 2022 showed a significant (P<.001) association between sunscreen use and FFA.22 A majority of allergens identified on patch testing included UVA- and UVB-absorbing agents found in sunscreens and other products including cosmetics,11,12 such as drometrizole trisiloxane, ethylhexyl salicylate, avobenzone, and benzophenone-4. Drometrizole trisiloxane is a photostabilizer and a broad-spectrum UV filter that is not approved for use in sunscreens in the United States.23 It also is effective in stabilizing and preventing the degradation of avobenzone, a commonly used UVA filter.24
Fragrances—Fragrances are present in nearly every personal and cosmetic product, sometimes even in those advertised as being “fragrance free.” Hydroperoxides of linalool, BoP, and fragrance mix are common allergens that are found in a variety of personal care products including perfumes, cosmetics, and even household cleaning supplies.25 Simultaneous positive patch tests to BoP and fragrance mix are common due to shared components. Linalool can be found in various plants such as lavender, rose, bergamot, and jasmine.26 Upon air exposure, linalool auto-oxidizes to form allergenic hydroperoxides of linalool. Among patients with FFA, positive patch test reactions to fragrance chemicals are common and could be attributed to the use of fragranced hair products and facial cosmetics.
Hair Dyes and Bleaches—Allergic reactions to hair dyes and bleaches can result in severe ACD of the head/neck and, in rare cases, scarring alopecia.27 Chemicals found in these products include paraphenylenediamine (PPD) and ammonium persulfate. The most common hair dye allergen, PPD also is used in some rubbers and plastics. Ammonium persulfate is a chemical used in hair bleaches and to deodorize oils. One case study reported a patient with FFA who developed chemically induced vitiligo immediately after the use of a hair color product that contained PPD.28 However, without patch testing to confirm the presence of contact allergy, other patient-specific and environmental risk factors could have contributed to FFA in this case.
A Knot in the Truth
In this endeavor to untangle the truth, it should be remembered that at the time of writing, the purported association between FFA and ACD remains debatable. Contact dermatitis specialists have voiced that the association between FFA and ACD, especially with regard to sunscreen, cannot be supported due to the lack of sufficient evidence.29 A large majority of the research conducted on FFA and ACD is based on case reports and studies limited to a small sample size, and most of these patch test studies lack a control group. Felmingham et al30 noted that the recent epidemiology of FFA aligns with increased sunscreen use. They also highlighted the limitations of the aforementioned studies, which include misclassification of exposures in the control group2 and recall bias in questionnaire participants.2,12 The most pressing limitation that permeates through most of these studies is the temporal ambiguity associated with sunscreen use. A study by Dhana et al31 failed to specify whether increased sunscreen use preceded the diagnosis of FFA or if it stems from the need to protect more exposed skin as a consequence of disease. Broad sunscreen avoidance due to concern for a possible association with hair loss could have detrimental health implications by increasing the risk for photodamage and skin cancer.
FFA Patch Testing
The avoidance of pertinent allergens could be effective in reducing local inflammation, pruritus, and erythema in FFA.9,14,32 At our institution, we selectively patch test patients with FFA when there is a suspected contact allergy. Clinical features that may allude to a potential contact allergy include an erythematous or eczematous dermatitis or symptoms of pruritus along the scalp or eyebrows. If patients recall hair loss or symptoms after using a hair or facial product, then a potential contact allergy to these products could be considered. Patch testing in patients with FFA includes the North American 80 Comprehensive Series and the cosmetic and hairdresser supplemental series, as well as an additional customized panel of 8 allergens as determined by patch testing experts at the University of Massachusetts, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Massachusetts General Hospital (private email communication, November 2017). Patch test readings are performed at 48 and 96 or 120 hours. Using the American Contact Dermatitis Society’s Contact Allergen Management Program, patients are provided personalized safe product lists and avoidance strategies are discussed.
Final Interpretation
In a world where cosmetic products are ubiquitous, it is hard to define the potential role of contact allergens in the entangled pathogenesis of FFA and ACD. As evidenced by emerging literature that correlates the 2 conditions and their exacerbating factors, it is important for physicians to have a comprehensive diagnostic approach and heightened awareness for potential allergens at play in FFA (Table). The identification of certain chemicals and preservatives as potential triggers for FFA should emphasize the importance of patch testing in these patients; however, whether the positive reactions are relevant to the pathogenesis or disease course of FFA still is unknown. While these findings begin to unravel the intertwined causes of FFA and ACD, further research encompassing larger cohorts and prospective studies is imperative to solidify these associations, define concrete guidelines, and improve patient outcomes.
References
Kossard S. Postmenopausal frontal fibrosing alopecia: scarring alopecia in a pattern distribution. Arch Dermatol. 1994;130:770-774. doi:10.1001/archderm.1994.01690060100013
Aldoori N, Dobson K, Holden CR, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia: possible association with leave-on facial skin care products and sunscreens; a questionnaire study. Br J Dermatol. 2016;175:762-767. doi:10.1111/bjd.14535
Debroy Kidambi A, Dobson K, Holmes S, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia in men: an association with facial moisturizers and sunscreens. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:260-261. doi:10.1111/bjd.15311
Starace M, Orlando G, Iorizzo M, et al. Clinical and dermoscopic approaches to diagnosis of frontal fibrosing alopecia: results from a multicenter study of the International Dermoscopy Society. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2022;12:E2022080. doi:10.5826/dpc.1201a80
Fechine COC, Valente NYS, Romiti R. Lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia: review and update of diagnostic and therapeutic features. An Bras Dermatol. 2022;97:348-357. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.08.008
Frontal fibrosing alopecia: a review of disease pathogenesis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:911944. doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.911944
Del Duca E, Ruano Ruiz J, Pavel AB, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia shows robust T helper 1 and Janus kinase 3 skewing. Br J Dermatol. 2020;183:1083-1093. doi:10.1111/bjd.19040
Tziotzios C, Petridis C, Dand N, et al. Genome-wide association study in frontal fibrosing alopecia identifies four susceptibility loci including HLA-B*07:02. Nat Commun. 2019;10:1150. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09117-w
Navarro‐Belmonte MR, Navarro‐López V, Ramírez‐Boscà A, et al. Case series of familial frontal fibrosing alopecia and a review of the literature. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2015;14:64-69. doi:10.1111/jocd.12125
Cuenca-Barrales C, Ruiz-Villaverde R, Molina-Leyva A. Familial frontal fibrosing alopecia. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2021;21:E320-E323. doi:10.18295/squmj.2021.21.02.025
Pastor-Nieto MA, Gatica-Ortega ME. Allergic contact dermatitis to drometrizole trisiloxane in a woman thereafter diagnosed with frontal fibrosing alopecia. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;89:215-217. doi:10.1111/cod.14370
Moreno-Arrones OM, Saceda-Corralo D, Rodrigues-Barata AR, et al. Risk factors associated with frontal fibrosing alopecia: a multicentre case–control study. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2019;44:404-410. doi:10.1111/ced.13785
Rudnicka L, Rokni GR, Lotti T, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis in patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia: an international multi-center study. Dermatol Ther. 2020;33:E13560. doi:10.1111/dth.13560
Prasad S, Marks DH, Burns LJ, et al. Patch testing and contact allergen avoidance in patients with lichen planopilaris and/or frontal fibrosing alopecia: a cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:659-661. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.01.026
Ocampo-Garza SS, Herz-Ruelas ME, Chavez-Alvarez S, et al. Association of frontal fibrosing alopecia and contact allergens in everyday skincare products in Hispanic females: a case-control study. An Bras Dermatol. 2021;96:776-778. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2020.09.013
Shtaynberger B, Bruder P, Zippin JH. The prevalence of type iv hypersensitivity in patients with lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia. Dermatitis. 2023;34:351-352. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000965
Kahkeshani N, Farzaei F, Fotouhi M, et al. Pharmacological effects of gallic acid in health and diseases: a mechanistic review. Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2019;22:225-237. doi:10.22038/ijbms.2019.32806.7897
Holcomb ZE, Van Noord MG, Atwater AR. Gallate contact dermatitis: product update and systematic review. Dermatitis. 2017;28:115-127. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000263
Gorris A, Valencak J, Schremser V, et al. Contact allergy to methylisothiazolinone with three clinical presentations in one patient. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;82:162-164. doi:10.1111/cod.13384
Uter W, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, et al. The epidemic of methylisothiazolinone contact allergy in Europe: follow-up on changing exposures. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:333-339. doi:10.1111/jdv.15875
Batista M, Morgado F, Gonçalo M. Patch test reactivity to iodopropynyl butylcarbamate in consecutive patients during a period of 7 years. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81:54-55. doi:10.1111/cod.13213
Maghfour J, Ceresnie M, Olson J, et al. The association between frontal fibrosing alopecia, sunscreen, and moisturizers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;87:395-396. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.12.058
Hughes TM, Martin JA, Lewis VJ, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to drometrizole trisiloxane in a sunscreen with concomitant sensitivities to other sunscreens. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52:226-227. doi:10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.0566a.x
de Groot AC. Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru)—a critical review of the literature and assessment of the significance of positive patch test reactions and the usefulness of restrictive diets. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80:335-353. doi:10.1111/cod.13263
Sköld M, Börje A, Matura M, et al. Studies on the autoxidation and sensitizing capacity of the fragrance chemical linalool, identifying a linalool hydroperoxide. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;46:267-272. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.460504.x
Dev T, Khan E, Patel U, et al. Cicatricial alopecia following allergic contact dermatitis from hair dyes: a rare clinical presentation. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;86:59-61. doi:10.1111/cod.13974
De Souza B, Burns L, Senna MM. Frontal fibrosing alopecia preceding the development of vitiligo: a case report. JAAD Case Rep. 2020;6:154-155. doi:10.1016/j.jdcr.2019.12.011
Abuav R, Shon W. Are sunscreen particles involved in frontal fibrosing alopecia?—a TEM-EDXS analysis on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded alopecia biopsies (pilot study). Am J Dermatopathol. 2022;44:E135. doi:10.1097/DAD.0000000000002317
Felmingham C, Yip L, Tam M, et al. Allergy to sunscreen and leave-on facial products is not a likely causative mechanism in frontal fibrosing alopecia: perspective from contact allergy experts. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:481-482. doi:10.1111/bjd.18380
Dhana A, Gumedze F, Khumalo N. Regarding “frontal fibrosing alopecia: possible association with leave-on facial skincare products and sunscreens; a questionnaire study.” Br J Dermatol. 2016;176:836-837. doi:10.1111/bjd.15197
Pastor-Nieto MA, Gatica-Ortega ME, Sánchez-Herreros C, et al. Sensitization to benzyl salicylate and other allergens in patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;84:423-430. doi:10.1111/cod.13763
Rocha VB, Donati A, Contin LA, et al. Photopatch and patch testing in 63 patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia: a case series. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179:1402-1403. doi:10.1111/bjd.16933
References
Kossard S. Postmenopausal frontal fibrosing alopecia: scarring alopecia in a pattern distribution. Arch Dermatol. 1994;130:770-774. doi:10.1001/archderm.1994.01690060100013
Aldoori N, Dobson K, Holden CR, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia: possible association with leave-on facial skin care products and sunscreens; a questionnaire study. Br J Dermatol. 2016;175:762-767. doi:10.1111/bjd.14535
Debroy Kidambi A, Dobson K, Holmes S, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia in men: an association with facial moisturizers and sunscreens. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177:260-261. doi:10.1111/bjd.15311
Starace M, Orlando G, Iorizzo M, et al. Clinical and dermoscopic approaches to diagnosis of frontal fibrosing alopecia: results from a multicenter study of the International Dermoscopy Society. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2022;12:E2022080. doi:10.5826/dpc.1201a80
Fechine COC, Valente NYS, Romiti R. Lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia: review and update of diagnostic and therapeutic features. An Bras Dermatol. 2022;97:348-357. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.08.008
Frontal fibrosing alopecia: a review of disease pathogenesis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:911944. doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.911944
Del Duca E, Ruano Ruiz J, Pavel AB, et al. Frontal fibrosing alopecia shows robust T helper 1 and Janus kinase 3 skewing. Br J Dermatol. 2020;183:1083-1093. doi:10.1111/bjd.19040
Tziotzios C, Petridis C, Dand N, et al. Genome-wide association study in frontal fibrosing alopecia identifies four susceptibility loci including HLA-B*07:02. Nat Commun. 2019;10:1150. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09117-w
Navarro‐Belmonte MR, Navarro‐López V, Ramírez‐Boscà A, et al. Case series of familial frontal fibrosing alopecia and a review of the literature. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2015;14:64-69. doi:10.1111/jocd.12125
Cuenca-Barrales C, Ruiz-Villaverde R, Molina-Leyva A. Familial frontal fibrosing alopecia. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2021;21:E320-E323. doi:10.18295/squmj.2021.21.02.025
Pastor-Nieto MA, Gatica-Ortega ME. Allergic contact dermatitis to drometrizole trisiloxane in a woman thereafter diagnosed with frontal fibrosing alopecia. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;89:215-217. doi:10.1111/cod.14370
Moreno-Arrones OM, Saceda-Corralo D, Rodrigues-Barata AR, et al. Risk factors associated with frontal fibrosing alopecia: a multicentre case–control study. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2019;44:404-410. doi:10.1111/ced.13785
Rudnicka L, Rokni GR, Lotti T, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis in patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia: an international multi-center study. Dermatol Ther. 2020;33:E13560. doi:10.1111/dth.13560
Prasad S, Marks DH, Burns LJ, et al. Patch testing and contact allergen avoidance in patients with lichen planopilaris and/or frontal fibrosing alopecia: a cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:659-661. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.01.026
Ocampo-Garza SS, Herz-Ruelas ME, Chavez-Alvarez S, et al. Association of frontal fibrosing alopecia and contact allergens in everyday skincare products in Hispanic females: a case-control study. An Bras Dermatol. 2021;96:776-778. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2020.09.013
Shtaynberger B, Bruder P, Zippin JH. The prevalence of type iv hypersensitivity in patients with lichen planopilaris and frontal fibrosing alopecia. Dermatitis. 2023;34:351-352. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000965
Kahkeshani N, Farzaei F, Fotouhi M, et al. Pharmacological effects of gallic acid in health and diseases: a mechanistic review. Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2019;22:225-237. doi:10.22038/ijbms.2019.32806.7897
Holcomb ZE, Van Noord MG, Atwater AR. Gallate contact dermatitis: product update and systematic review. Dermatitis. 2017;28:115-127. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000263
Gorris A, Valencak J, Schremser V, et al. Contact allergy to methylisothiazolinone with three clinical presentations in one patient. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;82:162-164. doi:10.1111/cod.13384
Uter W, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, et al. The epidemic of methylisothiazolinone contact allergy in Europe: follow-up on changing exposures. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:333-339. doi:10.1111/jdv.15875
Batista M, Morgado F, Gonçalo M. Patch test reactivity to iodopropynyl butylcarbamate in consecutive patients during a period of 7 years. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81:54-55. doi:10.1111/cod.13213
Maghfour J, Ceresnie M, Olson J, et al. The association between frontal fibrosing alopecia, sunscreen, and moisturizers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;87:395-396. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.12.058
Hughes TM, Martin JA, Lewis VJ, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to drometrizole trisiloxane in a sunscreen with concomitant sensitivities to other sunscreens. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52:226-227. doi:10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.0566a.x
de Groot AC. Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru)—a critical review of the literature and assessment of the significance of positive patch test reactions and the usefulness of restrictive diets. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;80:335-353. doi:10.1111/cod.13263
Sköld M, Börje A, Matura M, et al. Studies on the autoxidation and sensitizing capacity of the fragrance chemical linalool, identifying a linalool hydroperoxide. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;46:267-272. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.460504.x
Dev T, Khan E, Patel U, et al. Cicatricial alopecia following allergic contact dermatitis from hair dyes: a rare clinical presentation. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;86:59-61. doi:10.1111/cod.13974
De Souza B, Burns L, Senna MM. Frontal fibrosing alopecia preceding the development of vitiligo: a case report. JAAD Case Rep. 2020;6:154-155. doi:10.1016/j.jdcr.2019.12.011
Abuav R, Shon W. Are sunscreen particles involved in frontal fibrosing alopecia?—a TEM-EDXS analysis on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded alopecia biopsies (pilot study). Am J Dermatopathol. 2022;44:E135. doi:10.1097/DAD.0000000000002317
Felmingham C, Yip L, Tam M, et al. Allergy to sunscreen and leave-on facial products is not a likely causative mechanism in frontal fibrosing alopecia: perspective from contact allergy experts. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:481-482. doi:10.1111/bjd.18380
Dhana A, Gumedze F, Khumalo N. Regarding “frontal fibrosing alopecia: possible association with leave-on facial skincare products and sunscreens; a questionnaire study.” Br J Dermatol. 2016;176:836-837. doi:10.1111/bjd.15197
Pastor-Nieto MA, Gatica-Ortega ME, Sánchez-Herreros C, et al. Sensitization to benzyl salicylate and other allergens in patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;84:423-430. doi:10.1111/cod.13763
Rocha VB, Donati A, Contin LA, et al. Photopatch and patch testing in 63 patients with frontal fibrosing alopecia: a case series. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179:1402-1403. doi:10.1111/bjd.16933
Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA), a variant of lichen planopilaris (LPP), is an increasingly prevalent type of scarring alopecia that may have a closer relationship to contact allergy than was previously understood. However, there is no evidence of a causal association to date.
When evaluating for FFA/LPP, clinicians should assess for use of cosmetic products or sunscreens that may have a potential impact on the disease course.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Consolidated Pubs: Do Not Show Source Publication Logo
Dermatologic conditions affect approximately one-third of individuals in the United States.1,2 Nearly 1 in 4 physician office visits in the United States are for skin conditions, and less than one-third of these visits are with dermatologists. Although many of these patients may prefer to see a dermatologist for their concerns, they may not be able to access specialist care.3 The limited supply and urban-focused distribution of dermatologists along with reduced acceptance of state-funded insurance plans and long appointment wait times all pose considerable challenges to individuals seeking dermatologic care.2 Electronic consultations (e-consults) have emerged as a promising solution to overcoming these barriers while providing high-quality dermatologic care to a large diverse patient population.2,4 Although e-consults can be of service to all dermatology patients, this modality may be especially beneficial to underserved populations, such as the uninsured and Medicaid patients—groups that historically have experienced limited access to dermatology care due to the low reimbursement rates and high administrative burdens accompanying care delivery.4 This limited access leads to inequity in care, as timely access to dermatology is associated with improved diagnostic accuracy and disease outcomes.3 E-consult implementation can facilitate timely access for these underserved populations and bypass additional barriers to care such as lack of transportation or time off work. Prior e-consult studies have demonstrated relatively high numbers of Medicaid patients utilizing e-consult services.3,5
Although in-person visits remain the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of dermatologic conditions, e-consults placed by primary care providers (PCPs) can improve access and help triage patients who require in-person dermatology visits.6 In this study, we conducted a retrospective chart review to characterize the e-consults requested of the dermatology department at a large tertiary care medical center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Methods
The electronic health record (EHR) of Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) was screened for eligible patients from January 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021. Patients—both adult (aged ≥18 years) and pediatric (aged <18 years)—were included if they underwent a dermatology e-consult within this time frame. Provider notes in the medical records were reviewed to determine the nature of the lesion, how long the dermatologist took to complete the e-consult, whether an in-person appointment was recommended, and whether the patient was seen by dermatology within 90 days of the e-consult. Institutional review board approval was obtained.
For each e-consult, the PCP obtained clinical photographs of the lesion in question either through the EHR mobile application or by having patients upload their own photographs directly to their medical records. The referring PCP then completed a brief template regarding the patient’s clinical question and medical history and then sent the completed information to the consulting dermatologist’s EHR inbox. From there, the dermatologist could view the clinical question, documented photographs, and patient medical record to create a brief consult note with recommendations. The note was then sent back via EHR to the PCP to follow up with the patient. Patients were not charged for the e-consult.
Results
Two hundred fifty-four dermatology e-consults were requested by providers at the study center (eTable), which included 252 unique patients (2 patients had 2 separate e-consults regarding different clinical questions). The median time for completion of the e-consult—from submission of the PCP’s e-consult request to dermatologist completion—was 0.37 days. Fifty-six patients (22.0%) were recommended for an in-person appointment (Figure), 33 (58.9%) of whom ultimately scheduled the in-person appointment, and the median length of time between the completion of the e-consult and the in-person appointment was 16.5 days. The remaining 198 patients (78.0%) were not triaged to receive an in-person appointment following the e-consult,but 2 patients (8.7%) were ultimately seen in-person anyway via other referral pathways, with a median length of 33 days between e-consult completion and the in-person appointment. One hundred seventy-six patients (69.8%) avoided an in-person dermatology visit, although 38 (21.6%) of those patients were fewer than 90 days out from their e-consults at the time of data collection. The 254 e-consults included patients from 50 different zip codes, 49 (98.0%) of which were in North Carolina.
Adult and pediatric electronic consultations (e-consults) resulted in reduced frequencies of in-person dermatology appointments.a2 patients had 2 separate e-consults regarding different clinical questions.
Comment
An e-consult is an asynchronous telehealth modality through which PCPs can request specialty evaluation to provide diagnostic and therapeutic guidance, facilitate PCP-specialist coordination of care, and increase access to specialty care with reduced wait times.7,8 Increased care access is especially important, as specialty referral can decrease overall health care expenditure; however, the demand for specialists often exceeds the availability.8 Our e-consult program drastically reduced the time from patients’ initial presentation at their PCP’s office to dermatologist recommendations for treatment or need for in-person dermatology follow-up.
In our analysis, patients were of different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds and lived across a variety of zip codes, predominantly in central and western North Carolina. Almost three-quarters of the patients resided in zip codes where the average income was less than the North Carolina median household income ($66,196).9 Additionally, 82 patients (32.3%) were uninsured or on Medicaid (eTable). These economically disadvantaged patient populations historically have had limited access to dermatologic care.4 One study showed that privately insured individuals were accepted as new patients by dermatologists 91% of the time compared to a 29.8% acceptance rate for publicly insured individuals.10 Uninsured and Medicaid patients also have to wait 34% longer for an appointment compared to individuals with Medicare or private insurance.2 Considering these patients may already be at an economic disadvantage when it comes to seeing and paying for dermatologic services, e-consults may reduce patient travel and appointment expenses while increasing access to specialty care. Based on a 2020 study, each e-consult generates an estimated savings of $80 out-of-pocket per patient per avoided in-person visit.11
In our study, the most common condition for an e-consult in both adult and pediatric patients was rash, which is consistent with prior e-consult studies.5,11 We found that most e-consult patients were not recommended for an in-person dermatology visit, and for those who were recommended to have an in-person visit, the wait time was reduced (Figure). These results corroborate that e-consults may be used as an important triage tool for determining whether a specialist appointment is indicated as well as a public health tool, as timely evaluation is associated with better dermatologic health care outcomes.3 However, the number of patients who did not present for an in-person appointment in our study may be overestimated, as 38 patients’ (21.6%) e-consults were conducted fewer than 90 days before our data collection. Although none of these patients had been seen in person, it is possible they requested an in-person visit after their medical records were reviewed for this study. Additionally, it is possible patients sought care from outside providers not documented in the EHR.
With regard to the payment model for the e-consult program, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist initially piloted the e-consult system through a partnership with the American Academy of Medical Colleges’ Project CORE: Coordinating Optimal Referral Experiences (https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/health-care/project-core). Grant funding through Project CORE allowed both the referring PCP and the specialist completing the e-consult to each receive approximately 0.5 relative value units in payment for each consult completed. Based on early adoption successes, the institution has created additional internal funding to support the continued expansion of the e-consult system and is incentivized to continue funding, as proper utilization of e-consults improves patient access to timely specialist care, avoids no-shows or last-minute cancellations for specialist appointments, and decreases back-door access to specialist care through the emergency department and urgent care facilities.5 Although 0.5 relative value units is not equivalent compensation to an in-person office visit, our study showed that e-consults can be completed much more quickly and efficiently and do not utilize nursing staff or other office resources.
Conclusion
E-consults are an effective telehealth modality that can increase patients’ access to dermatologic specialty care. Patients who typically are underrepresented in dermatology practices especially may benefit from increased accessibility, and all patients requiring in-person visits may benefit from reduced appointment wait times. The savings generated by in-person appointment avoidance reduce overall health care expenditure as well as the burden of individual expenses. The short turnaround time for e-consults also allows PCPs to better manage dermatologic issues in a timely manner. Integrating and expanding e-consult programs into everyday practice would extend specialty care to broader populations and help reduce barriers to access to dermatologic care.
Acknowledgments—The authors thank the Wake Forest University School of Medicine Department of Medical Education and Department of Dermatology (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) for their contributions to this research study as well as the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) for their help extracting EHR data.
References
Hay RJ, Johns NE, Williams HC, et al. The global burden of skin disease in 2010: an analysis of the prevalence and impact of skin conditions. J Invest Dermatol. 2014;134:1527-1534.
Naka F, Lu J, Porto A, et al. Impact of dermatology econsults on access to care and skin cancer screening in underserved populations: a model for teledermatology services in community health centers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:293-302.
Mulcahy A, Mehrotra A, Edison K, et al. Variation in dermatologist visits by sociodemographic characteristics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:918-924.
Yang X, Barbieri JS, Kovarik CL. Cost analysis of a store-and-forward teledermatology consult system in Philadelphia. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:758-764.
Wang RF, Trinidad J, Lawrence J, et al. Improved patient access and outcomes with the integration of an econsult program (teledermatology) within a large academic medical center. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:1633-1638.
Lee KJ, Finnane A, Soyer HP. Recent trends in teledermatology and teledermoscopy. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8:214-223.
Parikh PJ, Mowrey C, Gallimore J, et al. Evaluating e-consultation implementations based on use and time-line across various specialties. Int J Med Inform. 2017;108:42-48.
Wasfy JH, Rao SK, Kalwani N, et al. Longer-term impact of cardiology e-consults. Am Heart J. 2016;173:86-93.
Alghothani L, Jacks SK, Vander Horst A, et al. Disparities in access to dermatologic care according to insurance type. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148:956-957.
Seiger K, Hawryluk EB, Kroshinsky D, et al. Pediatric dermatology econsults: reduced wait times and dermatology office visits. Pediatr Dermatol. 2020;37:804-810.
From the Center for Dermatology Research, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Katherine R. Salisbury and Drs. Porter and Ali report no conflict of interest. Dr. Strowd has received grants or support from AbbVie, Galderma, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Regeneron.
The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.
Correspondence: Katherine R. Salisbury, BS, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Blvd, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1071 (ksalisbu@wakehealth.edu).
From the Center for Dermatology Research, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Katherine R. Salisbury and Drs. Porter and Ali report no conflict of interest. Dr. Strowd has received grants or support from AbbVie, Galderma, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Regeneron.
The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.
Correspondence: Katherine R. Salisbury, BS, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Blvd, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1071 (ksalisbu@wakehealth.edu).
Author and Disclosure Information
From the Center for Dermatology Research, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Katherine R. Salisbury and Drs. Porter and Ali report no conflict of interest. Dr. Strowd has received grants or support from AbbVie, Galderma, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Regeneron.
The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.
Correspondence: Katherine R. Salisbury, BS, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Blvd, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1071 (ksalisbu@wakehealth.edu).
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE SOCIETY OF DERMATOLOGY HOSPITALISTS
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE SOCIETY OF DERMATOLOGY HOSPITALISTS
Dermatologic conditions affect approximately one-third of individuals in the United States.1,2 Nearly 1 in 4 physician office visits in the United States are for skin conditions, and less than one-third of these visits are with dermatologists. Although many of these patients may prefer to see a dermatologist for their concerns, they may not be able to access specialist care.3 The limited supply and urban-focused distribution of dermatologists along with reduced acceptance of state-funded insurance plans and long appointment wait times all pose considerable challenges to individuals seeking dermatologic care.2 Electronic consultations (e-consults) have emerged as a promising solution to overcoming these barriers while providing high-quality dermatologic care to a large diverse patient population.2,4 Although e-consults can be of service to all dermatology patients, this modality may be especially beneficial to underserved populations, such as the uninsured and Medicaid patients—groups that historically have experienced limited access to dermatology care due to the low reimbursement rates and high administrative burdens accompanying care delivery.4 This limited access leads to inequity in care, as timely access to dermatology is associated with improved diagnostic accuracy and disease outcomes.3 E-consult implementation can facilitate timely access for these underserved populations and bypass additional barriers to care such as lack of transportation or time off work. Prior e-consult studies have demonstrated relatively high numbers of Medicaid patients utilizing e-consult services.3,5
Although in-person visits remain the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of dermatologic conditions, e-consults placed by primary care providers (PCPs) can improve access and help triage patients who require in-person dermatology visits.6 In this study, we conducted a retrospective chart review to characterize the e-consults requested of the dermatology department at a large tertiary care medical center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Methods
The electronic health record (EHR) of Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) was screened for eligible patients from January 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021. Patients—both adult (aged ≥18 years) and pediatric (aged <18 years)—were included if they underwent a dermatology e-consult within this time frame. Provider notes in the medical records were reviewed to determine the nature of the lesion, how long the dermatologist took to complete the e-consult, whether an in-person appointment was recommended, and whether the patient was seen by dermatology within 90 days of the e-consult. Institutional review board approval was obtained.
For each e-consult, the PCP obtained clinical photographs of the lesion in question either through the EHR mobile application or by having patients upload their own photographs directly to their medical records. The referring PCP then completed a brief template regarding the patient’s clinical question and medical history and then sent the completed information to the consulting dermatologist’s EHR inbox. From there, the dermatologist could view the clinical question, documented photographs, and patient medical record to create a brief consult note with recommendations. The note was then sent back via EHR to the PCP to follow up with the patient. Patients were not charged for the e-consult.
Results
Two hundred fifty-four dermatology e-consults were requested by providers at the study center (eTable), which included 252 unique patients (2 patients had 2 separate e-consults regarding different clinical questions). The median time for completion of the e-consult—from submission of the PCP’s e-consult request to dermatologist completion—was 0.37 days. Fifty-six patients (22.0%) were recommended for an in-person appointment (Figure), 33 (58.9%) of whom ultimately scheduled the in-person appointment, and the median length of time between the completion of the e-consult and the in-person appointment was 16.5 days. The remaining 198 patients (78.0%) were not triaged to receive an in-person appointment following the e-consult,but 2 patients (8.7%) were ultimately seen in-person anyway via other referral pathways, with a median length of 33 days between e-consult completion and the in-person appointment. One hundred seventy-six patients (69.8%) avoided an in-person dermatology visit, although 38 (21.6%) of those patients were fewer than 90 days out from their e-consults at the time of data collection. The 254 e-consults included patients from 50 different zip codes, 49 (98.0%) of which were in North Carolina.
Adult and pediatric electronic consultations (e-consults) resulted in reduced frequencies of in-person dermatology appointments.a2 patients had 2 separate e-consults regarding different clinical questions.
Comment
An e-consult is an asynchronous telehealth modality through which PCPs can request specialty evaluation to provide diagnostic and therapeutic guidance, facilitate PCP-specialist coordination of care, and increase access to specialty care with reduced wait times.7,8 Increased care access is especially important, as specialty referral can decrease overall health care expenditure; however, the demand for specialists often exceeds the availability.8 Our e-consult program drastically reduced the time from patients’ initial presentation at their PCP’s office to dermatologist recommendations for treatment or need for in-person dermatology follow-up.
In our analysis, patients were of different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds and lived across a variety of zip codes, predominantly in central and western North Carolina. Almost three-quarters of the patients resided in zip codes where the average income was less than the North Carolina median household income ($66,196).9 Additionally, 82 patients (32.3%) were uninsured or on Medicaid (eTable). These economically disadvantaged patient populations historically have had limited access to dermatologic care.4 One study showed that privately insured individuals were accepted as new patients by dermatologists 91% of the time compared to a 29.8% acceptance rate for publicly insured individuals.10 Uninsured and Medicaid patients also have to wait 34% longer for an appointment compared to individuals with Medicare or private insurance.2 Considering these patients may already be at an economic disadvantage when it comes to seeing and paying for dermatologic services, e-consults may reduce patient travel and appointment expenses while increasing access to specialty care. Based on a 2020 study, each e-consult generates an estimated savings of $80 out-of-pocket per patient per avoided in-person visit.11
In our study, the most common condition for an e-consult in both adult and pediatric patients was rash, which is consistent with prior e-consult studies.5,11 We found that most e-consult patients were not recommended for an in-person dermatology visit, and for those who were recommended to have an in-person visit, the wait time was reduced (Figure). These results corroborate that e-consults may be used as an important triage tool for determining whether a specialist appointment is indicated as well as a public health tool, as timely evaluation is associated with better dermatologic health care outcomes.3 However, the number of patients who did not present for an in-person appointment in our study may be overestimated, as 38 patients’ (21.6%) e-consults were conducted fewer than 90 days before our data collection. Although none of these patients had been seen in person, it is possible they requested an in-person visit after their medical records were reviewed for this study. Additionally, it is possible patients sought care from outside providers not documented in the EHR.
With regard to the payment model for the e-consult program, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist initially piloted the e-consult system through a partnership with the American Academy of Medical Colleges’ Project CORE: Coordinating Optimal Referral Experiences (https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/health-care/project-core). Grant funding through Project CORE allowed both the referring PCP and the specialist completing the e-consult to each receive approximately 0.5 relative value units in payment for each consult completed. Based on early adoption successes, the institution has created additional internal funding to support the continued expansion of the e-consult system and is incentivized to continue funding, as proper utilization of e-consults improves patient access to timely specialist care, avoids no-shows or last-minute cancellations for specialist appointments, and decreases back-door access to specialist care through the emergency department and urgent care facilities.5 Although 0.5 relative value units is not equivalent compensation to an in-person office visit, our study showed that e-consults can be completed much more quickly and efficiently and do not utilize nursing staff or other office resources.
Conclusion
E-consults are an effective telehealth modality that can increase patients’ access to dermatologic specialty care. Patients who typically are underrepresented in dermatology practices especially may benefit from increased accessibility, and all patients requiring in-person visits may benefit from reduced appointment wait times. The savings generated by in-person appointment avoidance reduce overall health care expenditure as well as the burden of individual expenses. The short turnaround time for e-consults also allows PCPs to better manage dermatologic issues in a timely manner. Integrating and expanding e-consult programs into everyday practice would extend specialty care to broader populations and help reduce barriers to access to dermatologic care.
Acknowledgments—The authors thank the Wake Forest University School of Medicine Department of Medical Education and Department of Dermatology (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) for their contributions to this research study as well as the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) for their help extracting EHR data.
Dermatologic conditions affect approximately one-third of individuals in the United States.1,2 Nearly 1 in 4 physician office visits in the United States are for skin conditions, and less than one-third of these visits are with dermatologists. Although many of these patients may prefer to see a dermatologist for their concerns, they may not be able to access specialist care.3 The limited supply and urban-focused distribution of dermatologists along with reduced acceptance of state-funded insurance plans and long appointment wait times all pose considerable challenges to individuals seeking dermatologic care.2 Electronic consultations (e-consults) have emerged as a promising solution to overcoming these barriers while providing high-quality dermatologic care to a large diverse patient population.2,4 Although e-consults can be of service to all dermatology patients, this modality may be especially beneficial to underserved populations, such as the uninsured and Medicaid patients—groups that historically have experienced limited access to dermatology care due to the low reimbursement rates and high administrative burdens accompanying care delivery.4 This limited access leads to inequity in care, as timely access to dermatology is associated with improved diagnostic accuracy and disease outcomes.3 E-consult implementation can facilitate timely access for these underserved populations and bypass additional barriers to care such as lack of transportation or time off work. Prior e-consult studies have demonstrated relatively high numbers of Medicaid patients utilizing e-consult services.3,5
Although in-person visits remain the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of dermatologic conditions, e-consults placed by primary care providers (PCPs) can improve access and help triage patients who require in-person dermatology visits.6 In this study, we conducted a retrospective chart review to characterize the e-consults requested of the dermatology department at a large tertiary care medical center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Methods
The electronic health record (EHR) of Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) was screened for eligible patients from January 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021. Patients—both adult (aged ≥18 years) and pediatric (aged <18 years)—were included if they underwent a dermatology e-consult within this time frame. Provider notes in the medical records were reviewed to determine the nature of the lesion, how long the dermatologist took to complete the e-consult, whether an in-person appointment was recommended, and whether the patient was seen by dermatology within 90 days of the e-consult. Institutional review board approval was obtained.
For each e-consult, the PCP obtained clinical photographs of the lesion in question either through the EHR mobile application or by having patients upload their own photographs directly to their medical records. The referring PCP then completed a brief template regarding the patient’s clinical question and medical history and then sent the completed information to the consulting dermatologist’s EHR inbox. From there, the dermatologist could view the clinical question, documented photographs, and patient medical record to create a brief consult note with recommendations. The note was then sent back via EHR to the PCP to follow up with the patient. Patients were not charged for the e-consult.
Results
Two hundred fifty-four dermatology e-consults were requested by providers at the study center (eTable), which included 252 unique patients (2 patients had 2 separate e-consults regarding different clinical questions). The median time for completion of the e-consult—from submission of the PCP’s e-consult request to dermatologist completion—was 0.37 days. Fifty-six patients (22.0%) were recommended for an in-person appointment (Figure), 33 (58.9%) of whom ultimately scheduled the in-person appointment, and the median length of time between the completion of the e-consult and the in-person appointment was 16.5 days. The remaining 198 patients (78.0%) were not triaged to receive an in-person appointment following the e-consult,but 2 patients (8.7%) were ultimately seen in-person anyway via other referral pathways, with a median length of 33 days between e-consult completion and the in-person appointment. One hundred seventy-six patients (69.8%) avoided an in-person dermatology visit, although 38 (21.6%) of those patients were fewer than 90 days out from their e-consults at the time of data collection. The 254 e-consults included patients from 50 different zip codes, 49 (98.0%) of which were in North Carolina.
Adult and pediatric electronic consultations (e-consults) resulted in reduced frequencies of in-person dermatology appointments.a2 patients had 2 separate e-consults regarding different clinical questions.
Comment
An e-consult is an asynchronous telehealth modality through which PCPs can request specialty evaluation to provide diagnostic and therapeutic guidance, facilitate PCP-specialist coordination of care, and increase access to specialty care with reduced wait times.7,8 Increased care access is especially important, as specialty referral can decrease overall health care expenditure; however, the demand for specialists often exceeds the availability.8 Our e-consult program drastically reduced the time from patients’ initial presentation at their PCP’s office to dermatologist recommendations for treatment or need for in-person dermatology follow-up.
In our analysis, patients were of different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds and lived across a variety of zip codes, predominantly in central and western North Carolina. Almost three-quarters of the patients resided in zip codes where the average income was less than the North Carolina median household income ($66,196).9 Additionally, 82 patients (32.3%) were uninsured or on Medicaid (eTable). These economically disadvantaged patient populations historically have had limited access to dermatologic care.4 One study showed that privately insured individuals were accepted as new patients by dermatologists 91% of the time compared to a 29.8% acceptance rate for publicly insured individuals.10 Uninsured and Medicaid patients also have to wait 34% longer for an appointment compared to individuals with Medicare or private insurance.2 Considering these patients may already be at an economic disadvantage when it comes to seeing and paying for dermatologic services, e-consults may reduce patient travel and appointment expenses while increasing access to specialty care. Based on a 2020 study, each e-consult generates an estimated savings of $80 out-of-pocket per patient per avoided in-person visit.11
In our study, the most common condition for an e-consult in both adult and pediatric patients was rash, which is consistent with prior e-consult studies.5,11 We found that most e-consult patients were not recommended for an in-person dermatology visit, and for those who were recommended to have an in-person visit, the wait time was reduced (Figure). These results corroborate that e-consults may be used as an important triage tool for determining whether a specialist appointment is indicated as well as a public health tool, as timely evaluation is associated with better dermatologic health care outcomes.3 However, the number of patients who did not present for an in-person appointment in our study may be overestimated, as 38 patients’ (21.6%) e-consults were conducted fewer than 90 days before our data collection. Although none of these patients had been seen in person, it is possible they requested an in-person visit after their medical records were reviewed for this study. Additionally, it is possible patients sought care from outside providers not documented in the EHR.
With regard to the payment model for the e-consult program, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist initially piloted the e-consult system through a partnership with the American Academy of Medical Colleges’ Project CORE: Coordinating Optimal Referral Experiences (https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/health-care/project-core). Grant funding through Project CORE allowed both the referring PCP and the specialist completing the e-consult to each receive approximately 0.5 relative value units in payment for each consult completed. Based on early adoption successes, the institution has created additional internal funding to support the continued expansion of the e-consult system and is incentivized to continue funding, as proper utilization of e-consults improves patient access to timely specialist care, avoids no-shows or last-minute cancellations for specialist appointments, and decreases back-door access to specialist care through the emergency department and urgent care facilities.5 Although 0.5 relative value units is not equivalent compensation to an in-person office visit, our study showed that e-consults can be completed much more quickly and efficiently and do not utilize nursing staff or other office resources.
Conclusion
E-consults are an effective telehealth modality that can increase patients’ access to dermatologic specialty care. Patients who typically are underrepresented in dermatology practices especially may benefit from increased accessibility, and all patients requiring in-person visits may benefit from reduced appointment wait times. The savings generated by in-person appointment avoidance reduce overall health care expenditure as well as the burden of individual expenses. The short turnaround time for e-consults also allows PCPs to better manage dermatologic issues in a timely manner. Integrating and expanding e-consult programs into everyday practice would extend specialty care to broader populations and help reduce barriers to access to dermatologic care.
Acknowledgments—The authors thank the Wake Forest University School of Medicine Department of Medical Education and Department of Dermatology (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) for their contributions to this research study as well as the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) for their help extracting EHR data.
References
Hay RJ, Johns NE, Williams HC, et al. The global burden of skin disease in 2010: an analysis of the prevalence and impact of skin conditions. J Invest Dermatol. 2014;134:1527-1534.
Naka F, Lu J, Porto A, et al. Impact of dermatology econsults on access to care and skin cancer screening in underserved populations: a model for teledermatology services in community health centers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:293-302.
Mulcahy A, Mehrotra A, Edison K, et al. Variation in dermatologist visits by sociodemographic characteristics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:918-924.
Yang X, Barbieri JS, Kovarik CL. Cost analysis of a store-and-forward teledermatology consult system in Philadelphia. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:758-764.
Wang RF, Trinidad J, Lawrence J, et al. Improved patient access and outcomes with the integration of an econsult program (teledermatology) within a large academic medical center. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:1633-1638.
Lee KJ, Finnane A, Soyer HP. Recent trends in teledermatology and teledermoscopy. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8:214-223.
Parikh PJ, Mowrey C, Gallimore J, et al. Evaluating e-consultation implementations based on use and time-line across various specialties. Int J Med Inform. 2017;108:42-48.
Wasfy JH, Rao SK, Kalwani N, et al. Longer-term impact of cardiology e-consults. Am Heart J. 2016;173:86-93.
Alghothani L, Jacks SK, Vander Horst A, et al. Disparities in access to dermatologic care according to insurance type. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148:956-957.
Seiger K, Hawryluk EB, Kroshinsky D, et al. Pediatric dermatology econsults: reduced wait times and dermatology office visits. Pediatr Dermatol. 2020;37:804-810.
References
Hay RJ, Johns NE, Williams HC, et al. The global burden of skin disease in 2010: an analysis of the prevalence and impact of skin conditions. J Invest Dermatol. 2014;134:1527-1534.
Naka F, Lu J, Porto A, et al. Impact of dermatology econsults on access to care and skin cancer screening in underserved populations: a model for teledermatology services in community health centers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:293-302.
Mulcahy A, Mehrotra A, Edison K, et al. Variation in dermatologist visits by sociodemographic characteristics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:918-924.
Yang X, Barbieri JS, Kovarik CL. Cost analysis of a store-and-forward teledermatology consult system in Philadelphia. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:758-764.
Wang RF, Trinidad J, Lawrence J, et al. Improved patient access and outcomes with the integration of an econsult program (teledermatology) within a large academic medical center. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:1633-1638.
Lee KJ, Finnane A, Soyer HP. Recent trends in teledermatology and teledermoscopy. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8:214-223.
Parikh PJ, Mowrey C, Gallimore J, et al. Evaluating e-consultation implementations based on use and time-line across various specialties. Int J Med Inform. 2017;108:42-48.
Wasfy JH, Rao SK, Kalwani N, et al. Longer-term impact of cardiology e-consults. Am Heart J. 2016;173:86-93.
Alghothani L, Jacks SK, Vander Horst A, et al. Disparities in access to dermatologic care according to insurance type. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148:956-957.
Seiger K, Hawryluk EB, Kroshinsky D, et al. Pediatric dermatology econsults: reduced wait times and dermatology office visits. Pediatr Dermatol. 2020;37:804-810.
Vulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS) is an underserved area in medicine and dermatology. We discuss updates in VLS, which include the following: (1) development of core outcome domains to include in all future clinical trials, with current efforts focused on determining outcome measurements for each domain; (2) increased understanding of the impact VLS has on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes; (3) expanded disease associations; (4) clinical and histologic variants, including vestibular sclerosis and nonsclerotic VLS; and (5) updates in management of VLS.
Core Outcomes Measures
The burden of VLS is challenging to quantify, with little agreement among experts.1 Recently there has been a focus on developing scoring scales to measure disease progression and treatment response. Simpson et al2 pioneered the development of a core outcome set to be included in all future clinical trials for genital lichen sclerosus (LS)—clinical (visible) signs, symptoms, and LS-specific QOL.
Although there is no standardized method for assessing disease severity, various scales have been proposed to measure clinical findings in VLS, such as the vulvar architecture severity scale3 as well as the clinical LS score,4 which is the only validated scale to incorporate the signs and architectural changes identified by a 2018 Delphi consensus group of the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease.5 Work is ongoing to identify and evaluate outcome measurement instruments for each of the 3 core outcome domains.
Increased Understanding of QOL Impacts
Pain, pruritus, impairment of sexual function, genitourinary complications, architectural changes, and risk for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) all have been well established as VLS sequelae.6,7 Recent studies have focused on the QOL impact and associations with psychiatric comorbidities. A matched case-control study found that LS was significantly associated with depression and anxiety among US women (P<.001), and individuals with LS had a more than 2-fold increased odds of receiving a diagnosis of depression or anxiety.8
A review evaluating QOL outcomes in LS found that overall QOL was impaired. Female patients reported worse QOL in the work-school domain of the dermatology life quality index compared with male counterparts.9
Finally, a study exploring the experiences of patients living with VLS highlighted the secrecy and stigma of the condition,10 which serves as a call to action to improve the general population’s knowledge about vulvar anatomy and create change in societal attitudes on vulvar conditions.
Although there are several instruments assessing vulvar-specific QOL, most are for patients with vulvar cancer and focus on sexual function. In 2020, Saunderson et al11 published the 15-item vulvar quality of life index (VQLI), which has broad implications for measuring vulvar disease burden and is an important tool for standardizing vulvar disease measurements and outcomes for clinical research.12 The VQLI, though not specific to VLS, consists of 4 domains to assess vulvar QOL including symptoms, anxiety, activities of daily living, and sexuality. Studies have evaluated this scoring system in patients with VLS, with 1 study finding that VQLI correlated with clinician-rated severity scores (P=.01) and overall patient itch/discomfort score (P<.001) in VLS.13,14
Expanded Disease Associations
Lichen sclerosus has a well-known association with vulvar SCC and other autoimmune conditions, including thyroid disease and bullous pemphigoid.15-17 Recent studies also have revealed an association between LS and psoriasis.18 A case-control study from a single center found VLS was associated with elevated body mass index, statin usage, and cholecystectomy.19 Gynecologic pain syndromes, interstitial cystitis, urinary incontinence, and some gastrointestinal tract disorders including celiac disease also have been found to be increased in patients with VLS.20 Finally, the incidence of cutaneous immune-related adverse events such as LS has increased as the use of immune checkpoint therapies as anticancer treatments has expanded.21 Clinicians should be aware of these potential disease associations when caring for patients with VLS.
The incidence of VLS is higher in lower estrogen states throughout the lifespan, and a recent case-control study evaluated the cutaneous hormonal and microbial landscapes in postmenopausal patients (6 patients with VLS; 12 controls).22 Levels of the following cutaneous hormones in the groin were found to be altered in patients with VLS compared with controls: estrone (lower; P=.006), progesterone (higher; P<.0001), and testosterone (lower; P=.02). The authors found that most hormone levels normalized following treatment with a topical steroid. Additionally, bacterial microbiome alterations were seen in patients with VLS compared with controls. Thus, cutaneous sex hormone and skin microbiome alterations may be associated with VLS.22
Updates in Clinical and Histologic Variants
Less-recognized variants of VLS have been characterized in recent years. Vestibular sclerosis is a variant of VLS with unique clinical and histopathologic features; it is characterized by involvement localized to the anterior vestibule and either an absent or sparse lymphocytic infiltrate on histopathology.23,24 Nonsclerotic VLS is a variant with clinical features consistent with VLS that does not exhibit dermal sclerosis on histopathology. Thus, a diagnosis of nonsclerotic VLS requires clinicopathologic correlation. Four nonsclerotic histopathologic subtypes are proposed: lichenoid, hypertrophic lichenoid, dermal fibrosis without acanthosis, and dermal fibrosis with acanthosis.25 Longitudinal studies that correlate duration, signs, and symptoms will be important to further understand these variants.
Management Updates
First-line treatment of VLS still consists of ultrapotent topical corticosteroids with chronic maintenance therapy (usually lifetime) to decrease the risk for SCC and architectural changes.26 However, a survey across social media platforms found steroid phobia is common in patients with VLS (N=865), with approximately 40% of respondents endorsing waiting as long as they could before using topical corticosteroids and stopping as soon as possible.27 Clinicians should be aware of possible patient perceptions in the use of chronic steroids when discussing this therapy.
Randomized controlled trials utilizing fractional CO2 devices for VLS have been performed with conflicting results and no consensus regarding outcome measurement.28,29 Additionally, long-term disease outcomes following laser use have not been investigated. Although there is evidence that both ablative and nonablative devices can improve symptoms and signs, there is no evidence that they offer a cure for a chronic inflammatory skin condition. Current evidence suggests that even for patients undergoing these procedures, maintenance therapy is still essential to prevent sequelae.30 Future studies incorporating standardized outcome measures will be important for assessing the benefits of laser therapy in VLS. Finally, the reasons why topical corticosteroids may fail in an individual patient are multifaceted and should be explored thoroughly when considering laser therapy for VLS.
Studies evaluating the role of systemic therapies for refractory cases of VLS have expanded. A systematic review of systemic therapies for both genital and extragenital LS found oral corticosteroids and methotrexate were the most-reported systemic treatment regimens.31 Use of biologics in LS has been reported, with cases utilizing adalimumab for VLS and dupilumab for extragenital LS. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors including abrocitinib and baricitinib also has been reported for LS.31 A clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of topical ruxolitinib in VLS was recently completed (ClinicalTrials.govidentifier NCT05593445). Future research studies likely will focus on the safety and efficacy of targeted and steroid-sparing therapies for patients with VLS.
Final Thoughts
Vulvar lichen sclerosus increasingly is becoming recognized as a chronic genital skin condition that impacts QOL and health outcomes, with a need to develop more effective and safe evidence-based therapies. Recent literature has focused on the importance of developing and standardizing disease outcomes; identifying disease associations including the role of cutaneous hormones and microbiome alterations; characterizing histologic and clinical variants; and staying up-to-date on management, including the need for understanding patient perceptions of chronic topical steroid therapy. Each of these are important updates for clinicians to consider when caring for patients with VLS. Future studies likely will focus on elucidating disease etiology and mechanisms to gain a better understanding of VLS pathogenesis and potential targets for therapies as well as implementation of clinical trials that incorporate standardized outcome domains to test efficacy and safety of additional therapies.
References
Sheinis M, Green N, Vieira-Baptista P, et al. Adult vulvar lichen sclerosus: can experts agree on the assessment of disease severity? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24:295-298. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000534
Simpson RC, Kirtschig G, Selk A, et al. Core outcome domains for lichen sclerosus: a CORALS initiative consensus statement. Br J Dermatol. 2023;188:628-635. doi:10.1093/bjd/ljac145
Almadori A, Zenner N, Boyle D, et al. Development and validation of a clinical grading scale to assess the vulvar region: the Vulvar Architecture Severity Scale. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40:1319-1326. doi:10.1093/asj/sjz342
Erni B, Navarini AA, Huang D, et al. Proposition of a severity scale for lichen sclerosus: the “Clinical Lichen Sclerosus Score.” Dermatol Ther. 2021;34:E14773. doi:10.1111/dth.14773
Sheinis M, Selk A. Development of the Adult Vulvar Lichen Sclerosus Severity Scale—a Delphi Consensus Exercise for Item Generation. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018;22:66-73. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000361
Mauskar MM, Marathe K, Venkatesan A, et al. Vulvar diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1287-1298. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.10.077
Wijaya M, Lee G, Fischer G. Why do some patients with vulval lichen sclerosus on long-term topical corticosteroid treatment experience ongoing poor quality of life? Australas J Dermatol. 2022;63:463-472. doi:10.1111/ajd.13926
Fan R, Leasure AC, Maisha FI, et al. Depression and anxiety in patients with lichen sclerosus. JAMA Dermatol. 2022;158:953-954. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.1964
Ranum A, Pearson DR. The impact of genital lichen sclerosus and lichen planus on quality of life: a review. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2022;8:E042. doi:10.1097/JW9.0000000000000042
Arnold S, Fernando S, Rees S. Living with vulval lichen sclerosus: a qualitative interview study. Br J Dermatol. 2022;187:909-918. doi:10.1111/bjd.21777
Saunderson RB, Harris V, Yeh R, et al. Vulvar quality of life index (VQLI)—a simple tool to measure quality of life in patients with vulvar disease. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61:152-157. doi:10.1111/ajd.13235
Pyle HJ, Evans JC, Vandergriff TW, et al. Vulvar lichen sclerosus clinical severity scales and histopathologic correlation: a case series. Am J Dermatopathol. 2023;45:588-592. doi:10.1097/DAD.0000000000002471
Wijaya M, Lee G, Fischer G. Quality of life of women with untreated vulval lichen sclerosus assessed with vulval quality of life index (VQLI) [published online January 28, 2021]. Australas J Dermatol. 2021;62:177-182. doi:10.1111/ajd.13530
Felmingham C, Chan L, Doyle LW, et al. The Vulval Disease Quality of Life Index in women with vulval lichen sclerosus correlates with clinician and symptom scores [published online November 14, 2019]. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61:110-118. doi:10.1111/ajd.13197
Walsh ML, Leonard N, Shawki H, et al. Lichen sclerosus and immunobullous disease. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012;16:468-470. doi:10.1097/LGT.0b013e31825e9b18
Chin S, Scurry J, Bradford J, et al. Association of topical corticosteroids with reduced vulvar squamous cell carcinoma recurrence in patients with vulvar lichen sclerosus. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156:813. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.1074
Fan R, Leasure AC, Maisha FI, et al. Thyroid disorders associated with lichen sclerosus: a case–control study in the All of Us Research Program. Br J Dermatol. 2022;187:797-799. doi:10.1111/bjd.21702
Fan R, Leasure AC, Little AJ, et al. Lichen sclerosus among women with psoriasis: a cross-sectional study in the All of Us research program. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88:1175-1177. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2022.12.012
Luu Y, Cheng AL, Reisz C. Elevated body mass index, statin use, and cholecystectomy are associated with vulvar lichen sclerosus: a retrospective, case-control study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88:1376-1378. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2023.01.023
Söderlund JM, Hieta NK, Kurki SH, et al. Comorbidity of urogynecological and gastrointestinal disorders in female patients with lichen sclerosus. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;2:156-160. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000727
Shin L, Smith J, Shiu J, et al. Association of lichen sclerosus and morphea with immune checkpoint therapy: a systematic review. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2023;9:E070. doi:10.1097/JW9.0000000000000070
Pyle HJ, Evans JC, Artami M, et al. Assessment of the cutaneous hormone landscapes and microbiomes in vulvar lichen sclerosus [published online February 16, 2024]. J Invest Dermatol. 2024:S0022-202X(24)00111-8. doi:10.1016/j.jid.2024.01.027
Day T, Burston K, Dennerstein G, et al. Vestibulovaginal sclerosis versus lichen sclerosus. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2018;37:356-363. doi:10.1097/PGP.0000000000000441
Croker BA, Scurry JP, Petry FM, et al. Vestibular sclerosis: is this a new, distinct clinicopathological entity? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018;22:260-263. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000404
Day T, Selim MA, Allbritton JI, et al. Nonsclerotic lichen sclerosus: definition of a concept and pathologic description. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;27:358-364. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000760
Lee A, Bradford J, Fischer G. Long-term management of adult vulvar lichen sclerosus: a prospective cohort study of 507 women. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1061. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.0643
Delpero E, Sriharan A, Selk A. Steroid phobia in patients with vulvar lichen sclerosus. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;27:286-290. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000753
Burkett LS, Siddique M, Zeymo A, et al. Clobetasol compared with fractionated carbon dioxide laser for lichen sclerosus: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137:968-978. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004332
Mitchell L, Goldstein AT, Heller D, et al. Fractionated carbon dioxide laser for the treatment of vulvar lichen sclerosus: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137:979-987. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004409
Li HOY, Bailey AMJ, Tan MG, Dover JS. Lasers as an adjuvant for vulvar lichen sclerosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;86:694-696. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.02.081
Hargis A, Ngo M, Kraus CN, et al. Systemic therapy for lichen sclerosus: a systematic review [published online November 4, 2023]. J Low Genit Tract Dis. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000775
From the University of California, Irvine. Britney T. Nguyen is from the School of Medicine, and Dr. Kraus is from the Department of Dermatology.
Britney T. Nguyen reports no conflict of interest. Dr. Kraus is supported by a Dermatology Foundation Career Development Award and is a consultant for Nuvig Therapeutics and an investigator for Incyte Corporation.
Correspondence: Christina N. Kraus, MD, UC Irvine Health, 118 Med Surg I, Irvine, CA 92697 (ckraus@hs.uci.edu).
From the University of California, Irvine. Britney T. Nguyen is from the School of Medicine, and Dr. Kraus is from the Department of Dermatology.
Britney T. Nguyen reports no conflict of interest. Dr. Kraus is supported by a Dermatology Foundation Career Development Award and is a consultant for Nuvig Therapeutics and an investigator for Incyte Corporation.
Correspondence: Christina N. Kraus, MD, UC Irvine Health, 118 Med Surg I, Irvine, CA 92697 (ckraus@hs.uci.edu).
doi:10.12788/cutis.0967
Author and Disclosure Information
From the University of California, Irvine. Britney T. Nguyen is from the School of Medicine, and Dr. Kraus is from the Department of Dermatology.
Britney T. Nguyen reports no conflict of interest. Dr. Kraus is supported by a Dermatology Foundation Career Development Award and is a consultant for Nuvig Therapeutics and an investigator for Incyte Corporation.
Correspondence: Christina N. Kraus, MD, UC Irvine Health, 118 Med Surg I, Irvine, CA 92697 (ckraus@hs.uci.edu).
Vulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS) is an underserved area in medicine and dermatology. We discuss updates in VLS, which include the following: (1) development of core outcome domains to include in all future clinical trials, with current efforts focused on determining outcome measurements for each domain; (2) increased understanding of the impact VLS has on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes; (3) expanded disease associations; (4) clinical and histologic variants, including vestibular sclerosis and nonsclerotic VLS; and (5) updates in management of VLS.
Core Outcomes Measures
The burden of VLS is challenging to quantify, with little agreement among experts.1 Recently there has been a focus on developing scoring scales to measure disease progression and treatment response. Simpson et al2 pioneered the development of a core outcome set to be included in all future clinical trials for genital lichen sclerosus (LS)—clinical (visible) signs, symptoms, and LS-specific QOL.
Although there is no standardized method for assessing disease severity, various scales have been proposed to measure clinical findings in VLS, such as the vulvar architecture severity scale3 as well as the clinical LS score,4 which is the only validated scale to incorporate the signs and architectural changes identified by a 2018 Delphi consensus group of the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease.5 Work is ongoing to identify and evaluate outcome measurement instruments for each of the 3 core outcome domains.
Increased Understanding of QOL Impacts
Pain, pruritus, impairment of sexual function, genitourinary complications, architectural changes, and risk for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) all have been well established as VLS sequelae.6,7 Recent studies have focused on the QOL impact and associations with psychiatric comorbidities. A matched case-control study found that LS was significantly associated with depression and anxiety among US women (P<.001), and individuals with LS had a more than 2-fold increased odds of receiving a diagnosis of depression or anxiety.8
A review evaluating QOL outcomes in LS found that overall QOL was impaired. Female patients reported worse QOL in the work-school domain of the dermatology life quality index compared with male counterparts.9
Finally, a study exploring the experiences of patients living with VLS highlighted the secrecy and stigma of the condition,10 which serves as a call to action to improve the general population’s knowledge about vulvar anatomy and create change in societal attitudes on vulvar conditions.
Although there are several instruments assessing vulvar-specific QOL, most are for patients with vulvar cancer and focus on sexual function. In 2020, Saunderson et al11 published the 15-item vulvar quality of life index (VQLI), which has broad implications for measuring vulvar disease burden and is an important tool for standardizing vulvar disease measurements and outcomes for clinical research.12 The VQLI, though not specific to VLS, consists of 4 domains to assess vulvar QOL including symptoms, anxiety, activities of daily living, and sexuality. Studies have evaluated this scoring system in patients with VLS, with 1 study finding that VQLI correlated with clinician-rated severity scores (P=.01) and overall patient itch/discomfort score (P<.001) in VLS.13,14
Expanded Disease Associations
Lichen sclerosus has a well-known association with vulvar SCC and other autoimmune conditions, including thyroid disease and bullous pemphigoid.15-17 Recent studies also have revealed an association between LS and psoriasis.18 A case-control study from a single center found VLS was associated with elevated body mass index, statin usage, and cholecystectomy.19 Gynecologic pain syndromes, interstitial cystitis, urinary incontinence, and some gastrointestinal tract disorders including celiac disease also have been found to be increased in patients with VLS.20 Finally, the incidence of cutaneous immune-related adverse events such as LS has increased as the use of immune checkpoint therapies as anticancer treatments has expanded.21 Clinicians should be aware of these potential disease associations when caring for patients with VLS.
The incidence of VLS is higher in lower estrogen states throughout the lifespan, and a recent case-control study evaluated the cutaneous hormonal and microbial landscapes in postmenopausal patients (6 patients with VLS; 12 controls).22 Levels of the following cutaneous hormones in the groin were found to be altered in patients with VLS compared with controls: estrone (lower; P=.006), progesterone (higher; P<.0001), and testosterone (lower; P=.02). The authors found that most hormone levels normalized following treatment with a topical steroid. Additionally, bacterial microbiome alterations were seen in patients with VLS compared with controls. Thus, cutaneous sex hormone and skin microbiome alterations may be associated with VLS.22
Updates in Clinical and Histologic Variants
Less-recognized variants of VLS have been characterized in recent years. Vestibular sclerosis is a variant of VLS with unique clinical and histopathologic features; it is characterized by involvement localized to the anterior vestibule and either an absent or sparse lymphocytic infiltrate on histopathology.23,24 Nonsclerotic VLS is a variant with clinical features consistent with VLS that does not exhibit dermal sclerosis on histopathology. Thus, a diagnosis of nonsclerotic VLS requires clinicopathologic correlation. Four nonsclerotic histopathologic subtypes are proposed: lichenoid, hypertrophic lichenoid, dermal fibrosis without acanthosis, and dermal fibrosis with acanthosis.25 Longitudinal studies that correlate duration, signs, and symptoms will be important to further understand these variants.
Management Updates
First-line treatment of VLS still consists of ultrapotent topical corticosteroids with chronic maintenance therapy (usually lifetime) to decrease the risk for SCC and architectural changes.26 However, a survey across social media platforms found steroid phobia is common in patients with VLS (N=865), with approximately 40% of respondents endorsing waiting as long as they could before using topical corticosteroids and stopping as soon as possible.27 Clinicians should be aware of possible patient perceptions in the use of chronic steroids when discussing this therapy.
Randomized controlled trials utilizing fractional CO2 devices for VLS have been performed with conflicting results and no consensus regarding outcome measurement.28,29 Additionally, long-term disease outcomes following laser use have not been investigated. Although there is evidence that both ablative and nonablative devices can improve symptoms and signs, there is no evidence that they offer a cure for a chronic inflammatory skin condition. Current evidence suggests that even for patients undergoing these procedures, maintenance therapy is still essential to prevent sequelae.30 Future studies incorporating standardized outcome measures will be important for assessing the benefits of laser therapy in VLS. Finally, the reasons why topical corticosteroids may fail in an individual patient are multifaceted and should be explored thoroughly when considering laser therapy for VLS.
Studies evaluating the role of systemic therapies for refractory cases of VLS have expanded. A systematic review of systemic therapies for both genital and extragenital LS found oral corticosteroids and methotrexate were the most-reported systemic treatment regimens.31 Use of biologics in LS has been reported, with cases utilizing adalimumab for VLS and dupilumab for extragenital LS. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors including abrocitinib and baricitinib also has been reported for LS.31 A clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of topical ruxolitinib in VLS was recently completed (ClinicalTrials.govidentifier NCT05593445). Future research studies likely will focus on the safety and efficacy of targeted and steroid-sparing therapies for patients with VLS.
Final Thoughts
Vulvar lichen sclerosus increasingly is becoming recognized as a chronic genital skin condition that impacts QOL and health outcomes, with a need to develop more effective and safe evidence-based therapies. Recent literature has focused on the importance of developing and standardizing disease outcomes; identifying disease associations including the role of cutaneous hormones and microbiome alterations; characterizing histologic and clinical variants; and staying up-to-date on management, including the need for understanding patient perceptions of chronic topical steroid therapy. Each of these are important updates for clinicians to consider when caring for patients with VLS. Future studies likely will focus on elucidating disease etiology and mechanisms to gain a better understanding of VLS pathogenesis and potential targets for therapies as well as implementation of clinical trials that incorporate standardized outcome domains to test efficacy and safety of additional therapies.
Vulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS) is an underserved area in medicine and dermatology. We discuss updates in VLS, which include the following: (1) development of core outcome domains to include in all future clinical trials, with current efforts focused on determining outcome measurements for each domain; (2) increased understanding of the impact VLS has on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes; (3) expanded disease associations; (4) clinical and histologic variants, including vestibular sclerosis and nonsclerotic VLS; and (5) updates in management of VLS.
Core Outcomes Measures
The burden of VLS is challenging to quantify, with little agreement among experts.1 Recently there has been a focus on developing scoring scales to measure disease progression and treatment response. Simpson et al2 pioneered the development of a core outcome set to be included in all future clinical trials for genital lichen sclerosus (LS)—clinical (visible) signs, symptoms, and LS-specific QOL.
Although there is no standardized method for assessing disease severity, various scales have been proposed to measure clinical findings in VLS, such as the vulvar architecture severity scale3 as well as the clinical LS score,4 which is the only validated scale to incorporate the signs and architectural changes identified by a 2018 Delphi consensus group of the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease.5 Work is ongoing to identify and evaluate outcome measurement instruments for each of the 3 core outcome domains.
Increased Understanding of QOL Impacts
Pain, pruritus, impairment of sexual function, genitourinary complications, architectural changes, and risk for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) all have been well established as VLS sequelae.6,7 Recent studies have focused on the QOL impact and associations with psychiatric comorbidities. A matched case-control study found that LS was significantly associated with depression and anxiety among US women (P<.001), and individuals with LS had a more than 2-fold increased odds of receiving a diagnosis of depression or anxiety.8
A review evaluating QOL outcomes in LS found that overall QOL was impaired. Female patients reported worse QOL in the work-school domain of the dermatology life quality index compared with male counterparts.9
Finally, a study exploring the experiences of patients living with VLS highlighted the secrecy and stigma of the condition,10 which serves as a call to action to improve the general population’s knowledge about vulvar anatomy and create change in societal attitudes on vulvar conditions.
Although there are several instruments assessing vulvar-specific QOL, most are for patients with vulvar cancer and focus on sexual function. In 2020, Saunderson et al11 published the 15-item vulvar quality of life index (VQLI), which has broad implications for measuring vulvar disease burden and is an important tool for standardizing vulvar disease measurements and outcomes for clinical research.12 The VQLI, though not specific to VLS, consists of 4 domains to assess vulvar QOL including symptoms, anxiety, activities of daily living, and sexuality. Studies have evaluated this scoring system in patients with VLS, with 1 study finding that VQLI correlated with clinician-rated severity scores (P=.01) and overall patient itch/discomfort score (P<.001) in VLS.13,14
Expanded Disease Associations
Lichen sclerosus has a well-known association with vulvar SCC and other autoimmune conditions, including thyroid disease and bullous pemphigoid.15-17 Recent studies also have revealed an association between LS and psoriasis.18 A case-control study from a single center found VLS was associated with elevated body mass index, statin usage, and cholecystectomy.19 Gynecologic pain syndromes, interstitial cystitis, urinary incontinence, and some gastrointestinal tract disorders including celiac disease also have been found to be increased in patients with VLS.20 Finally, the incidence of cutaneous immune-related adverse events such as LS has increased as the use of immune checkpoint therapies as anticancer treatments has expanded.21 Clinicians should be aware of these potential disease associations when caring for patients with VLS.
The incidence of VLS is higher in lower estrogen states throughout the lifespan, and a recent case-control study evaluated the cutaneous hormonal and microbial landscapes in postmenopausal patients (6 patients with VLS; 12 controls).22 Levels of the following cutaneous hormones in the groin were found to be altered in patients with VLS compared with controls: estrone (lower; P=.006), progesterone (higher; P<.0001), and testosterone (lower; P=.02). The authors found that most hormone levels normalized following treatment with a topical steroid. Additionally, bacterial microbiome alterations were seen in patients with VLS compared with controls. Thus, cutaneous sex hormone and skin microbiome alterations may be associated with VLS.22
Updates in Clinical and Histologic Variants
Less-recognized variants of VLS have been characterized in recent years. Vestibular sclerosis is a variant of VLS with unique clinical and histopathologic features; it is characterized by involvement localized to the anterior vestibule and either an absent or sparse lymphocytic infiltrate on histopathology.23,24 Nonsclerotic VLS is a variant with clinical features consistent with VLS that does not exhibit dermal sclerosis on histopathology. Thus, a diagnosis of nonsclerotic VLS requires clinicopathologic correlation. Four nonsclerotic histopathologic subtypes are proposed: lichenoid, hypertrophic lichenoid, dermal fibrosis without acanthosis, and dermal fibrosis with acanthosis.25 Longitudinal studies that correlate duration, signs, and symptoms will be important to further understand these variants.
Management Updates
First-line treatment of VLS still consists of ultrapotent topical corticosteroids with chronic maintenance therapy (usually lifetime) to decrease the risk for SCC and architectural changes.26 However, a survey across social media platforms found steroid phobia is common in patients with VLS (N=865), with approximately 40% of respondents endorsing waiting as long as they could before using topical corticosteroids and stopping as soon as possible.27 Clinicians should be aware of possible patient perceptions in the use of chronic steroids when discussing this therapy.
Randomized controlled trials utilizing fractional CO2 devices for VLS have been performed with conflicting results and no consensus regarding outcome measurement.28,29 Additionally, long-term disease outcomes following laser use have not been investigated. Although there is evidence that both ablative and nonablative devices can improve symptoms and signs, there is no evidence that they offer a cure for a chronic inflammatory skin condition. Current evidence suggests that even for patients undergoing these procedures, maintenance therapy is still essential to prevent sequelae.30 Future studies incorporating standardized outcome measures will be important for assessing the benefits of laser therapy in VLS. Finally, the reasons why topical corticosteroids may fail in an individual patient are multifaceted and should be explored thoroughly when considering laser therapy for VLS.
Studies evaluating the role of systemic therapies for refractory cases of VLS have expanded. A systematic review of systemic therapies for both genital and extragenital LS found oral corticosteroids and methotrexate were the most-reported systemic treatment regimens.31 Use of biologics in LS has been reported, with cases utilizing adalimumab for VLS and dupilumab for extragenital LS. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors including abrocitinib and baricitinib also has been reported for LS.31 A clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of topical ruxolitinib in VLS was recently completed (ClinicalTrials.govidentifier NCT05593445). Future research studies likely will focus on the safety and efficacy of targeted and steroid-sparing therapies for patients with VLS.
Final Thoughts
Vulvar lichen sclerosus increasingly is becoming recognized as a chronic genital skin condition that impacts QOL and health outcomes, with a need to develop more effective and safe evidence-based therapies. Recent literature has focused on the importance of developing and standardizing disease outcomes; identifying disease associations including the role of cutaneous hormones and microbiome alterations; characterizing histologic and clinical variants; and staying up-to-date on management, including the need for understanding patient perceptions of chronic topical steroid therapy. Each of these are important updates for clinicians to consider when caring for patients with VLS. Future studies likely will focus on elucidating disease etiology and mechanisms to gain a better understanding of VLS pathogenesis and potential targets for therapies as well as implementation of clinical trials that incorporate standardized outcome domains to test efficacy and safety of additional therapies.
References
Sheinis M, Green N, Vieira-Baptista P, et al. Adult vulvar lichen sclerosus: can experts agree on the assessment of disease severity? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24:295-298. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000534
Simpson RC, Kirtschig G, Selk A, et al. Core outcome domains for lichen sclerosus: a CORALS initiative consensus statement. Br J Dermatol. 2023;188:628-635. doi:10.1093/bjd/ljac145
Almadori A, Zenner N, Boyle D, et al. Development and validation of a clinical grading scale to assess the vulvar region: the Vulvar Architecture Severity Scale. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40:1319-1326. doi:10.1093/asj/sjz342
Erni B, Navarini AA, Huang D, et al. Proposition of a severity scale for lichen sclerosus: the “Clinical Lichen Sclerosus Score.” Dermatol Ther. 2021;34:E14773. doi:10.1111/dth.14773
Sheinis M, Selk A. Development of the Adult Vulvar Lichen Sclerosus Severity Scale—a Delphi Consensus Exercise for Item Generation. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018;22:66-73. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000361
Mauskar MM, Marathe K, Venkatesan A, et al. Vulvar diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1287-1298. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.10.077
Wijaya M, Lee G, Fischer G. Why do some patients with vulval lichen sclerosus on long-term topical corticosteroid treatment experience ongoing poor quality of life? Australas J Dermatol. 2022;63:463-472. doi:10.1111/ajd.13926
Fan R, Leasure AC, Maisha FI, et al. Depression and anxiety in patients with lichen sclerosus. JAMA Dermatol. 2022;158:953-954. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.1964
Ranum A, Pearson DR. The impact of genital lichen sclerosus and lichen planus on quality of life: a review. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2022;8:E042. doi:10.1097/JW9.0000000000000042
Arnold S, Fernando S, Rees S. Living with vulval lichen sclerosus: a qualitative interview study. Br J Dermatol. 2022;187:909-918. doi:10.1111/bjd.21777
Saunderson RB, Harris V, Yeh R, et al. Vulvar quality of life index (VQLI)—a simple tool to measure quality of life in patients with vulvar disease. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61:152-157. doi:10.1111/ajd.13235
Pyle HJ, Evans JC, Vandergriff TW, et al. Vulvar lichen sclerosus clinical severity scales and histopathologic correlation: a case series. Am J Dermatopathol. 2023;45:588-592. doi:10.1097/DAD.0000000000002471
Wijaya M, Lee G, Fischer G. Quality of life of women with untreated vulval lichen sclerosus assessed with vulval quality of life index (VQLI) [published online January 28, 2021]. Australas J Dermatol. 2021;62:177-182. doi:10.1111/ajd.13530
Felmingham C, Chan L, Doyle LW, et al. The Vulval Disease Quality of Life Index in women with vulval lichen sclerosus correlates with clinician and symptom scores [published online November 14, 2019]. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61:110-118. doi:10.1111/ajd.13197
Walsh ML, Leonard N, Shawki H, et al. Lichen sclerosus and immunobullous disease. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012;16:468-470. doi:10.1097/LGT.0b013e31825e9b18
Chin S, Scurry J, Bradford J, et al. Association of topical corticosteroids with reduced vulvar squamous cell carcinoma recurrence in patients with vulvar lichen sclerosus. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156:813. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.1074
Fan R, Leasure AC, Maisha FI, et al. Thyroid disorders associated with lichen sclerosus: a case–control study in the All of Us Research Program. Br J Dermatol. 2022;187:797-799. doi:10.1111/bjd.21702
Fan R, Leasure AC, Little AJ, et al. Lichen sclerosus among women with psoriasis: a cross-sectional study in the All of Us research program. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88:1175-1177. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2022.12.012
Luu Y, Cheng AL, Reisz C. Elevated body mass index, statin use, and cholecystectomy are associated with vulvar lichen sclerosus: a retrospective, case-control study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88:1376-1378. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2023.01.023
Söderlund JM, Hieta NK, Kurki SH, et al. Comorbidity of urogynecological and gastrointestinal disorders in female patients with lichen sclerosus. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;2:156-160. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000727
Shin L, Smith J, Shiu J, et al. Association of lichen sclerosus and morphea with immune checkpoint therapy: a systematic review. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2023;9:E070. doi:10.1097/JW9.0000000000000070
Pyle HJ, Evans JC, Artami M, et al. Assessment of the cutaneous hormone landscapes and microbiomes in vulvar lichen sclerosus [published online February 16, 2024]. J Invest Dermatol. 2024:S0022-202X(24)00111-8. doi:10.1016/j.jid.2024.01.027
Day T, Burston K, Dennerstein G, et al. Vestibulovaginal sclerosis versus lichen sclerosus. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2018;37:356-363. doi:10.1097/PGP.0000000000000441
Croker BA, Scurry JP, Petry FM, et al. Vestibular sclerosis: is this a new, distinct clinicopathological entity? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018;22:260-263. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000404
Day T, Selim MA, Allbritton JI, et al. Nonsclerotic lichen sclerosus: definition of a concept and pathologic description. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;27:358-364. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000760
Lee A, Bradford J, Fischer G. Long-term management of adult vulvar lichen sclerosus: a prospective cohort study of 507 women. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1061. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.0643
Delpero E, Sriharan A, Selk A. Steroid phobia in patients with vulvar lichen sclerosus. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;27:286-290. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000753
Burkett LS, Siddique M, Zeymo A, et al. Clobetasol compared with fractionated carbon dioxide laser for lichen sclerosus: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137:968-978. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004332
Mitchell L, Goldstein AT, Heller D, et al. Fractionated carbon dioxide laser for the treatment of vulvar lichen sclerosus: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137:979-987. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004409
Li HOY, Bailey AMJ, Tan MG, Dover JS. Lasers as an adjuvant for vulvar lichen sclerosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;86:694-696. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.02.081
Hargis A, Ngo M, Kraus CN, et al. Systemic therapy for lichen sclerosus: a systematic review [published online November 4, 2023]. J Low Genit Tract Dis. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000775
References
Sheinis M, Green N, Vieira-Baptista P, et al. Adult vulvar lichen sclerosus: can experts agree on the assessment of disease severity? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24:295-298. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000534
Simpson RC, Kirtschig G, Selk A, et al. Core outcome domains for lichen sclerosus: a CORALS initiative consensus statement. Br J Dermatol. 2023;188:628-635. doi:10.1093/bjd/ljac145
Almadori A, Zenner N, Boyle D, et al. Development and validation of a clinical grading scale to assess the vulvar region: the Vulvar Architecture Severity Scale. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40:1319-1326. doi:10.1093/asj/sjz342
Erni B, Navarini AA, Huang D, et al. Proposition of a severity scale for lichen sclerosus: the “Clinical Lichen Sclerosus Score.” Dermatol Ther. 2021;34:E14773. doi:10.1111/dth.14773
Sheinis M, Selk A. Development of the Adult Vulvar Lichen Sclerosus Severity Scale—a Delphi Consensus Exercise for Item Generation. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018;22:66-73. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000361
Mauskar MM, Marathe K, Venkatesan A, et al. Vulvar diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1287-1298. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.10.077
Wijaya M, Lee G, Fischer G. Why do some patients with vulval lichen sclerosus on long-term topical corticosteroid treatment experience ongoing poor quality of life? Australas J Dermatol. 2022;63:463-472. doi:10.1111/ajd.13926
Fan R, Leasure AC, Maisha FI, et al. Depression and anxiety in patients with lichen sclerosus. JAMA Dermatol. 2022;158:953-954. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.1964
Ranum A, Pearson DR. The impact of genital lichen sclerosus and lichen planus on quality of life: a review. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2022;8:E042. doi:10.1097/JW9.0000000000000042
Arnold S, Fernando S, Rees S. Living with vulval lichen sclerosus: a qualitative interview study. Br J Dermatol. 2022;187:909-918. doi:10.1111/bjd.21777
Saunderson RB, Harris V, Yeh R, et al. Vulvar quality of life index (VQLI)—a simple tool to measure quality of life in patients with vulvar disease. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61:152-157. doi:10.1111/ajd.13235
Pyle HJ, Evans JC, Vandergriff TW, et al. Vulvar lichen sclerosus clinical severity scales and histopathologic correlation: a case series. Am J Dermatopathol. 2023;45:588-592. doi:10.1097/DAD.0000000000002471
Wijaya M, Lee G, Fischer G. Quality of life of women with untreated vulval lichen sclerosus assessed with vulval quality of life index (VQLI) [published online January 28, 2021]. Australas J Dermatol. 2021;62:177-182. doi:10.1111/ajd.13530
Felmingham C, Chan L, Doyle LW, et al. The Vulval Disease Quality of Life Index in women with vulval lichen sclerosus correlates with clinician and symptom scores [published online November 14, 2019]. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61:110-118. doi:10.1111/ajd.13197
Walsh ML, Leonard N, Shawki H, et al. Lichen sclerosus and immunobullous disease. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012;16:468-470. doi:10.1097/LGT.0b013e31825e9b18
Chin S, Scurry J, Bradford J, et al. Association of topical corticosteroids with reduced vulvar squamous cell carcinoma recurrence in patients with vulvar lichen sclerosus. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156:813. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.1074
Fan R, Leasure AC, Maisha FI, et al. Thyroid disorders associated with lichen sclerosus: a case–control study in the All of Us Research Program. Br J Dermatol. 2022;187:797-799. doi:10.1111/bjd.21702
Fan R, Leasure AC, Little AJ, et al. Lichen sclerosus among women with psoriasis: a cross-sectional study in the All of Us research program. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88:1175-1177. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2022.12.012
Luu Y, Cheng AL, Reisz C. Elevated body mass index, statin use, and cholecystectomy are associated with vulvar lichen sclerosus: a retrospective, case-control study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88:1376-1378. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2023.01.023
Söderlund JM, Hieta NK, Kurki SH, et al. Comorbidity of urogynecological and gastrointestinal disorders in female patients with lichen sclerosus. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;2:156-160. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000727
Shin L, Smith J, Shiu J, et al. Association of lichen sclerosus and morphea with immune checkpoint therapy: a systematic review. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2023;9:E070. doi:10.1097/JW9.0000000000000070
Pyle HJ, Evans JC, Artami M, et al. Assessment of the cutaneous hormone landscapes and microbiomes in vulvar lichen sclerosus [published online February 16, 2024]. J Invest Dermatol. 2024:S0022-202X(24)00111-8. doi:10.1016/j.jid.2024.01.027
Day T, Burston K, Dennerstein G, et al. Vestibulovaginal sclerosis versus lichen sclerosus. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2018;37:356-363. doi:10.1097/PGP.0000000000000441
Croker BA, Scurry JP, Petry FM, et al. Vestibular sclerosis: is this a new, distinct clinicopathological entity? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2018;22:260-263. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000404
Day T, Selim MA, Allbritton JI, et al. Nonsclerotic lichen sclerosus: definition of a concept and pathologic description. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;27:358-364. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000760
Lee A, Bradford J, Fischer G. Long-term management of adult vulvar lichen sclerosus: a prospective cohort study of 507 women. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1061. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.0643
Delpero E, Sriharan A, Selk A. Steroid phobia in patients with vulvar lichen sclerosus. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023;27:286-290. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000753
Burkett LS, Siddique M, Zeymo A, et al. Clobetasol compared with fractionated carbon dioxide laser for lichen sclerosus: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137:968-978. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004332
Mitchell L, Goldstein AT, Heller D, et al. Fractionated carbon dioxide laser for the treatment of vulvar lichen sclerosus: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;137:979-987. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004409
Li HOY, Bailey AMJ, Tan MG, Dover JS. Lasers as an adjuvant for vulvar lichen sclerosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;86:694-696. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.02.081
Hargis A, Ngo M, Kraus CN, et al. Systemic therapy for lichen sclerosus: a systematic review [published online November 4, 2023]. J Low Genit Tract Dis. doi:10.1097/LGT.0000000000000775
Precise wound approximation during cutaneous suturing is of vital importance for optimal closure and long-term scar outcomes. Although buried dermal sutures achieve wound-edge approximation and eversion, meticulous placement of epidermal sutures allows for fine-tuning of the wound edges through epidermal approximation, eversion, and the correction of minor height discrepancies (step-offs).
Several percutaneous suture techniques and materials are available to dermatologic surgeons. However, precise, gap- and tension-free approximation of the wound edges is desired for prompt re-epithelialization and a barely visible scar.1,2
Epidermal sutures should be placed under minimal tension to align the papillary dermis and epidermis precisely. The dermatologic surgeon can evaluate the effectiveness of their suturing technique by carefully examining the closure for visibility of the bilateral wound edges, which should show equally if approximation is precise; small gaps between the wound edges (undesired); or dermal bleeding, which is a manifestation of inaccurate approximation.
Advances in smartphone camera technology have led to high-quality photography in a variety of settings. Although smartphone photography often is used for documentation purposes in health care, we recommend incorporating it as a quality-control checkpoint for objective evaluation, allowing the dermatologic surgeon to scrutinize the wound edges and refine their surgical technique to improve scar outcomes.
The Technique
After suturing the wound closed, we routinely use a 12-megapixel smartphone camera (up to 2× optical zoom) to photograph the closed wound at 1× or 2× magnification to capture more details and use the zoom function to further evaluate the wound edges close-up (Figure). In any area where inadequate epidermal approximation is noted on the photograph, an additional stitch can be placed. Photography can be repeated until ideal reapproximation occurs.
Postoperative wound edge with 5-0 nylon sutures photographed using a 12-megapixel smartphone camera. A, The inferior aspect of the wound was not approximated perfectly, as evidenced by a thin line of blood between the 2 edges. B, Placement of a cross-stitch resulted in perfect epidermal approximation and eversion.
Practice Implications
Most smartphones released in recent years have a 12-megapixel camera, making them more easily accessible than surgical loupes. Additionally, surgical loupes are expensive, come with a learning curve, and can be intimidating to new or inexperienced surgeons or dermatology residents. Because virtually every dermatologic surgeon has access to a smartphone and snapping an image takes no more than a few seconds, we believe this technique is a valuable new self-assessment tool for dermatologic surgeons. It may be particularly valuable to dermatology residents and new/inexperienced surgeons looking to improve their techniques and scar outcomes.
References
Perry AW, McShane RH. Fine-tuning of the skin edges in the closure of surgical wounds. Controlling inversion and eversion with the path of the needle—the right stitch at the right time. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1981;7:471-476. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.1981.tb00680.x
Miller CJ, Antunes MB, Sobanko JF. Surgical technique for optimal outcomes: part II. repairing tissue: suturing. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:389-402. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.08.006
Precise wound approximation during cutaneous suturing is of vital importance for optimal closure and long-term scar outcomes. Although buried dermal sutures achieve wound-edge approximation and eversion, meticulous placement of epidermal sutures allows for fine-tuning of the wound edges through epidermal approximation, eversion, and the correction of minor height discrepancies (step-offs).
Several percutaneous suture techniques and materials are available to dermatologic surgeons. However, precise, gap- and tension-free approximation of the wound edges is desired for prompt re-epithelialization and a barely visible scar.1,2
Epidermal sutures should be placed under minimal tension to align the papillary dermis and epidermis precisely. The dermatologic surgeon can evaluate the effectiveness of their suturing technique by carefully examining the closure for visibility of the bilateral wound edges, which should show equally if approximation is precise; small gaps between the wound edges (undesired); or dermal bleeding, which is a manifestation of inaccurate approximation.
Advances in smartphone camera technology have led to high-quality photography in a variety of settings. Although smartphone photography often is used for documentation purposes in health care, we recommend incorporating it as a quality-control checkpoint for objective evaluation, allowing the dermatologic surgeon to scrutinize the wound edges and refine their surgical technique to improve scar outcomes.
The Technique
After suturing the wound closed, we routinely use a 12-megapixel smartphone camera (up to 2× optical zoom) to photograph the closed wound at 1× or 2× magnification to capture more details and use the zoom function to further evaluate the wound edges close-up (Figure). In any area where inadequate epidermal approximation is noted on the photograph, an additional stitch can be placed. Photography can be repeated until ideal reapproximation occurs.
Postoperative wound edge with 5-0 nylon sutures photographed using a 12-megapixel smartphone camera. A, The inferior aspect of the wound was not approximated perfectly, as evidenced by a thin line of blood between the 2 edges. B, Placement of a cross-stitch resulted in perfect epidermal approximation and eversion.
Practice Implications
Most smartphones released in recent years have a 12-megapixel camera, making them more easily accessible than surgical loupes. Additionally, surgical loupes are expensive, come with a learning curve, and can be intimidating to new or inexperienced surgeons or dermatology residents. Because virtually every dermatologic surgeon has access to a smartphone and snapping an image takes no more than a few seconds, we believe this technique is a valuable new self-assessment tool for dermatologic surgeons. It may be particularly valuable to dermatology residents and new/inexperienced surgeons looking to improve their techniques and scar outcomes.
Practice Gap
Precise wound approximation during cutaneous suturing is of vital importance for optimal closure and long-term scar outcomes. Although buried dermal sutures achieve wound-edge approximation and eversion, meticulous placement of epidermal sutures allows for fine-tuning of the wound edges through epidermal approximation, eversion, and the correction of minor height discrepancies (step-offs).
Several percutaneous suture techniques and materials are available to dermatologic surgeons. However, precise, gap- and tension-free approximation of the wound edges is desired for prompt re-epithelialization and a barely visible scar.1,2
Epidermal sutures should be placed under minimal tension to align the papillary dermis and epidermis precisely. The dermatologic surgeon can evaluate the effectiveness of their suturing technique by carefully examining the closure for visibility of the bilateral wound edges, which should show equally if approximation is precise; small gaps between the wound edges (undesired); or dermal bleeding, which is a manifestation of inaccurate approximation.
Advances in smartphone camera technology have led to high-quality photography in a variety of settings. Although smartphone photography often is used for documentation purposes in health care, we recommend incorporating it as a quality-control checkpoint for objective evaluation, allowing the dermatologic surgeon to scrutinize the wound edges and refine their surgical technique to improve scar outcomes.
The Technique
After suturing the wound closed, we routinely use a 12-megapixel smartphone camera (up to 2× optical zoom) to photograph the closed wound at 1× or 2× magnification to capture more details and use the zoom function to further evaluate the wound edges close-up (Figure). In any area where inadequate epidermal approximation is noted on the photograph, an additional stitch can be placed. Photography can be repeated until ideal reapproximation occurs.
Postoperative wound edge with 5-0 nylon sutures photographed using a 12-megapixel smartphone camera. A, The inferior aspect of the wound was not approximated perfectly, as evidenced by a thin line of blood between the 2 edges. B, Placement of a cross-stitch resulted in perfect epidermal approximation and eversion.
Practice Implications
Most smartphones released in recent years have a 12-megapixel camera, making them more easily accessible than surgical loupes. Additionally, surgical loupes are expensive, come with a learning curve, and can be intimidating to new or inexperienced surgeons or dermatology residents. Because virtually every dermatologic surgeon has access to a smartphone and snapping an image takes no more than a few seconds, we believe this technique is a valuable new self-assessment tool for dermatologic surgeons. It may be particularly valuable to dermatology residents and new/inexperienced surgeons looking to improve their techniques and scar outcomes.
References
Perry AW, McShane RH. Fine-tuning of the skin edges in the closure of surgical wounds. Controlling inversion and eversion with the path of the needle—the right stitch at the right time. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1981;7:471-476. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.1981.tb00680.x
Miller CJ, Antunes MB, Sobanko JF. Surgical technique for optimal outcomes: part II. repairing tissue: suturing. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:389-402. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.08.006
References
Perry AW, McShane RH. Fine-tuning of the skin edges in the closure of surgical wounds. Controlling inversion and eversion with the path of the needle—the right stitch at the right time. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1981;7:471-476. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.1981.tb00680.x
Miller CJ, Antunes MB, Sobanko JF. Surgical technique for optimal outcomes: part II. repairing tissue: suturing. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:389-402. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.08.006
Histopathology demonstrated diffuse parakeratosis with retention of keratohyalin granules throughout the stratum corneum consistent with a diagnosis of granular parakeratosis (Figure), a rare benign cutaneous condition that is thought to occur due to a defect in epidermal differentiation. The lesion resolved without additional treatment.
Histopathology revealed diffuse parakeratosis with retention of keratohyalin granules throughout the stratum corneum consistent with a diagnosis of granular parakeratosis (H&E, original magnification ×100).
The pathogenesis of granular parakeratosis is unclear, but a reactive process in which locoregional irritation or occlusion prompts increased cell turnover and prevention of profilaggrin breakdown has been proposed.1,2 The diagnosis is linked to various precipitating agents, most commonly topical products (eg, zinc oxide, antiperspirants) and products with benzalkonium chloride (eg, laundry rinses). These agents are thought to cause retention of keratohyalin granules in the stratum corneum during epidermal differentiation.1,2
Most affected patients are middle-aged women (mean age at diagnosis, 37.8 years).2 Patients present with eruptions of erythematous, brown, hyperkeratotic patches and papules that coalesce into plaques.1,2 These lesions can be pruritic and painful or asymptomatic. They often manifest bilaterally in intertriginous sites, most commonly the axillae, groin, or inguinal folds.1,2
Treatment involves identification and removal of potential triggers including changing antiperspirants, limiting use of irritating agents (eg, topical products with strong fragrances), and reducing heat and moisture in the affected areas. If the lesion persists, stepwise treatment can be initiated with topical agents (eg, corticosteroids, vitamin D analogues, retinoids, keratolytics, calcineurin inhibitors) followed by systemic medications (eg, antibiotics, isotretinoin, antifungals, dexamethasone) and procedures (eg, botulinum toxin injections, surgery, laser, cryotherapy).1,2
Unilateral granular parakeratosis, as seen in our patient, is an uncommon manifestation. Our case supports the theory that occlusion is a precipitating factor for this condition, given persistent axillary exposure to heat, sweat, and friction in the setting of limb immobilization.3
Granular parakeratosis is a challenge to diagnose due to clinical overlap with several other cutaneous conditions; histopathologic confirmation is required. Fox- Fordyce disease is a rare condition that is thought to result from keratin buildup or occlusion of apocrine or apoeccrine sweat ducts leading to duct rupture and surrounding inflammation.4 Common triggers include laser hair removal, hormonal changes, and living conditions that promote hot and humid environments.5 It can manifest similarly to granular parakeratosis, with eruptions of multiple red-violet papules that appear bilaterally in aprocine gland–rich areas, including the axillae and less commonly the genital, periareolar, thoracic, abdominal, and facial areas.4,5 However, most patients with Fox-Fordyce disease tend to be younger females (aged 13–35 years) with severely pruritic lesions,4,5 unlike our patient. In addition, histopathology shows hyperkeratosis, hair follicle plugging, and sweat gland and duct dilation.4
Seborrheic keratoses are common benign epidermal tumors caused by an overproliferation of immature keratinocytes.6,7 Similar to granular parakeratosis, they commonly manifest in older adults as hyperpigmented, well-demarcated, verrucous plaques with a hyperkeratotic surface.6 However, they are more common on the face, neck, trunk, and extremities, and they tend to be asymptomatic, differentiating them from granular parakerosis.6 Histopathology demonstrates a papillomatous epidermal surface, large capillaries in the dermal papillae, and intraepidermal and pseudohorn epidermal cysts.7
Inverse lichen planus, a variant of lichen planus, is a rare inflammatory condition that involves the lysis of basal keratinocytes by CD8+ lymphocytes.8 Similar to granular parakeratosis, lichen planus commonly affects middle-aged women (aged 30–60 years), and this particular variant manifests with asymptomatic or mildly pruritic, hyperpigmented patches and plaques in intertriginous areas. Although it also shows hyperkeratosis on histopathology, it can be differentiated from granular parakeratosis by the additional findings of epidermal hypergranulosis, sawtooth acanthosis of rete ridges, apoptotic keratinocytes in the dermoepidermal junction, and lymphocytic infiltrate in the upper dermis.8
Hailey-Hailey disease (also known as familial benign pemphigus) is a rare condition caused by an autosomaldominant mutation affecting intracellular calcium signaling that impairs keratinocyte adhesion.9 Similar to granular parakeratosis, it is most common in middle-aged adults (aged 30–40 years) and manifests as pruritic and burning lesions in symmetric intertriginous areas that also can be triggered by heat and sweating. However, patients present with recurrent blistering and vesicular lesions that may lead to erosions and secondary infections, which reduced clinical suspicion for this diagnosis in our patient. Histopathology shows suprabasilar and intraepidermal clefts, full-thickness acantholysis, protruding dermal papillae, and a perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate in the superficial dermis.9
References
Ding CY, Liu H, Khachemoune A. Granular parakeratosis: a comprehensive review and a critical reappraisal. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2015;16:495-500. doi:10.1007/s40257-015-0148-2
Ip KH, Li A. Clinical features, histology, and treatment outcomes of granular parakeratosis: a systematic review. Int J Dermatol. 2022;61:973-978. doi:10.1111/ijd.16107
Mehregan DA, Thomas JE, Mehregan DR. Intertriginous granular parakeratosis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998;39:495-496. doi:10.1016/s0190-9622(98)70333-0
Kamada A, Saga K, Jimbow K. Apoeccrine sweat duct obstruction as a cause for Fox-Fordyce disease. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;48:453-455. doi:10.1067/mjd.2003.93
Salloum A, Bouferraa Y, Bazzi N, et al. Pathophysiology, clinical findings, and management of Fox-Fordyce disease: a systematic review. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022;21:482-500. doi:10.1111/jocd.14135
Sun MD, Halpern AC. Advances in the etiology, detection, and clinical management of seborrheic keratoses. Dermatology. 2022;238:205-217. doi:10.1159/000517070
Minagawa A. Dermoscopy-pathology relationship in seborrheic keratosis. J Dermatol. 2017;44:518-524. doi:10.1111/1346-8138.13657
Weston G, Payette M. Update on lichen planus and its clinical variants [published online September 16, 2015]. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2015;1:140-149. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2015.04.001
Ben Lagha I, Ashack K, Khachemoune A. Hailey-Hailey disease: an update review with a focus on treatment data. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020;21:49-68. doi:10.1007/s40257-019-00477-z
Rebecca K. Yamamoto and Dr. Stringer are from the Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. Dr. Rogers is from and Dr. Stringer also is from MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Correspondence: Thomas P. Stringer, MD, MS, 5530 Wisconsin Ave, Ste 730, Chevy Chase, MD 20815 (Thomas.P.Stringer@medstar.net).
Rebecca K. Yamamoto and Dr. Stringer are from the Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. Dr. Rogers is from and Dr. Stringer also is from MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Correspondence: Thomas P. Stringer, MD, MS, 5530 Wisconsin Ave, Ste 730, Chevy Chase, MD 20815 (Thomas.P.Stringer@medstar.net).
Author and Disclosure Information
Rebecca K. Yamamoto and Dr. Stringer are from the Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. Dr. Rogers is from and Dr. Stringer also is from MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Correspondence: Thomas P. Stringer, MD, MS, 5530 Wisconsin Ave, Ste 730, Chevy Chase, MD 20815 (Thomas.P.Stringer@medstar.net).
Histopathology demonstrated diffuse parakeratosis with retention of keratohyalin granules throughout the stratum corneum consistent with a diagnosis of granular parakeratosis (Figure), a rare benign cutaneous condition that is thought to occur due to a defect in epidermal differentiation. The lesion resolved without additional treatment.
Histopathology revealed diffuse parakeratosis with retention of keratohyalin granules throughout the stratum corneum consistent with a diagnosis of granular parakeratosis (H&E, original magnification ×100).
The pathogenesis of granular parakeratosis is unclear, but a reactive process in which locoregional irritation or occlusion prompts increased cell turnover and prevention of profilaggrin breakdown has been proposed.1,2 The diagnosis is linked to various precipitating agents, most commonly topical products (eg, zinc oxide, antiperspirants) and products with benzalkonium chloride (eg, laundry rinses). These agents are thought to cause retention of keratohyalin granules in the stratum corneum during epidermal differentiation.1,2
Most affected patients are middle-aged women (mean age at diagnosis, 37.8 years).2 Patients present with eruptions of erythematous, brown, hyperkeratotic patches and papules that coalesce into plaques.1,2 These lesions can be pruritic and painful or asymptomatic. They often manifest bilaterally in intertriginous sites, most commonly the axillae, groin, or inguinal folds.1,2
Treatment involves identification and removal of potential triggers including changing antiperspirants, limiting use of irritating agents (eg, topical products with strong fragrances), and reducing heat and moisture in the affected areas. If the lesion persists, stepwise treatment can be initiated with topical agents (eg, corticosteroids, vitamin D analogues, retinoids, keratolytics, calcineurin inhibitors) followed by systemic medications (eg, antibiotics, isotretinoin, antifungals, dexamethasone) and procedures (eg, botulinum toxin injections, surgery, laser, cryotherapy).1,2
Unilateral granular parakeratosis, as seen in our patient, is an uncommon manifestation. Our case supports the theory that occlusion is a precipitating factor for this condition, given persistent axillary exposure to heat, sweat, and friction in the setting of limb immobilization.3
Granular parakeratosis is a challenge to diagnose due to clinical overlap with several other cutaneous conditions; histopathologic confirmation is required. Fox- Fordyce disease is a rare condition that is thought to result from keratin buildup or occlusion of apocrine or apoeccrine sweat ducts leading to duct rupture and surrounding inflammation.4 Common triggers include laser hair removal, hormonal changes, and living conditions that promote hot and humid environments.5 It can manifest similarly to granular parakeratosis, with eruptions of multiple red-violet papules that appear bilaterally in aprocine gland–rich areas, including the axillae and less commonly the genital, periareolar, thoracic, abdominal, and facial areas.4,5 However, most patients with Fox-Fordyce disease tend to be younger females (aged 13–35 years) with severely pruritic lesions,4,5 unlike our patient. In addition, histopathology shows hyperkeratosis, hair follicle plugging, and sweat gland and duct dilation.4
Seborrheic keratoses are common benign epidermal tumors caused by an overproliferation of immature keratinocytes.6,7 Similar to granular parakeratosis, they commonly manifest in older adults as hyperpigmented, well-demarcated, verrucous plaques with a hyperkeratotic surface.6 However, they are more common on the face, neck, trunk, and extremities, and they tend to be asymptomatic, differentiating them from granular parakerosis.6 Histopathology demonstrates a papillomatous epidermal surface, large capillaries in the dermal papillae, and intraepidermal and pseudohorn epidermal cysts.7
Inverse lichen planus, a variant of lichen planus, is a rare inflammatory condition that involves the lysis of basal keratinocytes by CD8+ lymphocytes.8 Similar to granular parakeratosis, lichen planus commonly affects middle-aged women (aged 30–60 years), and this particular variant manifests with asymptomatic or mildly pruritic, hyperpigmented patches and plaques in intertriginous areas. Although it also shows hyperkeratosis on histopathology, it can be differentiated from granular parakeratosis by the additional findings of epidermal hypergranulosis, sawtooth acanthosis of rete ridges, apoptotic keratinocytes in the dermoepidermal junction, and lymphocytic infiltrate in the upper dermis.8
Hailey-Hailey disease (also known as familial benign pemphigus) is a rare condition caused by an autosomaldominant mutation affecting intracellular calcium signaling that impairs keratinocyte adhesion.9 Similar to granular parakeratosis, it is most common in middle-aged adults (aged 30–40 years) and manifests as pruritic and burning lesions in symmetric intertriginous areas that also can be triggered by heat and sweating. However, patients present with recurrent blistering and vesicular lesions that may lead to erosions and secondary infections, which reduced clinical suspicion for this diagnosis in our patient. Histopathology shows suprabasilar and intraepidermal clefts, full-thickness acantholysis, protruding dermal papillae, and a perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate in the superficial dermis.9
The Diagnosis: Granular Parakeratosis
Histopathology demonstrated diffuse parakeratosis with retention of keratohyalin granules throughout the stratum corneum consistent with a diagnosis of granular parakeratosis (Figure), a rare benign cutaneous condition that is thought to occur due to a defect in epidermal differentiation. The lesion resolved without additional treatment.
Histopathology revealed diffuse parakeratosis with retention of keratohyalin granules throughout the stratum corneum consistent with a diagnosis of granular parakeratosis (H&E, original magnification ×100).
The pathogenesis of granular parakeratosis is unclear, but a reactive process in which locoregional irritation or occlusion prompts increased cell turnover and prevention of profilaggrin breakdown has been proposed.1,2 The diagnosis is linked to various precipitating agents, most commonly topical products (eg, zinc oxide, antiperspirants) and products with benzalkonium chloride (eg, laundry rinses). These agents are thought to cause retention of keratohyalin granules in the stratum corneum during epidermal differentiation.1,2
Most affected patients are middle-aged women (mean age at diagnosis, 37.8 years).2 Patients present with eruptions of erythematous, brown, hyperkeratotic patches and papules that coalesce into plaques.1,2 These lesions can be pruritic and painful or asymptomatic. They often manifest bilaterally in intertriginous sites, most commonly the axillae, groin, or inguinal folds.1,2
Treatment involves identification and removal of potential triggers including changing antiperspirants, limiting use of irritating agents (eg, topical products with strong fragrances), and reducing heat and moisture in the affected areas. If the lesion persists, stepwise treatment can be initiated with topical agents (eg, corticosteroids, vitamin D analogues, retinoids, keratolytics, calcineurin inhibitors) followed by systemic medications (eg, antibiotics, isotretinoin, antifungals, dexamethasone) and procedures (eg, botulinum toxin injections, surgery, laser, cryotherapy).1,2
Unilateral granular parakeratosis, as seen in our patient, is an uncommon manifestation. Our case supports the theory that occlusion is a precipitating factor for this condition, given persistent axillary exposure to heat, sweat, and friction in the setting of limb immobilization.3
Granular parakeratosis is a challenge to diagnose due to clinical overlap with several other cutaneous conditions; histopathologic confirmation is required. Fox- Fordyce disease is a rare condition that is thought to result from keratin buildup or occlusion of apocrine or apoeccrine sweat ducts leading to duct rupture and surrounding inflammation.4 Common triggers include laser hair removal, hormonal changes, and living conditions that promote hot and humid environments.5 It can manifest similarly to granular parakeratosis, with eruptions of multiple red-violet papules that appear bilaterally in aprocine gland–rich areas, including the axillae and less commonly the genital, periareolar, thoracic, abdominal, and facial areas.4,5 However, most patients with Fox-Fordyce disease tend to be younger females (aged 13–35 years) with severely pruritic lesions,4,5 unlike our patient. In addition, histopathology shows hyperkeratosis, hair follicle plugging, and sweat gland and duct dilation.4
Seborrheic keratoses are common benign epidermal tumors caused by an overproliferation of immature keratinocytes.6,7 Similar to granular parakeratosis, they commonly manifest in older adults as hyperpigmented, well-demarcated, verrucous plaques with a hyperkeratotic surface.6 However, they are more common on the face, neck, trunk, and extremities, and they tend to be asymptomatic, differentiating them from granular parakerosis.6 Histopathology demonstrates a papillomatous epidermal surface, large capillaries in the dermal papillae, and intraepidermal and pseudohorn epidermal cysts.7
Inverse lichen planus, a variant of lichen planus, is a rare inflammatory condition that involves the lysis of basal keratinocytes by CD8+ lymphocytes.8 Similar to granular parakeratosis, lichen planus commonly affects middle-aged women (aged 30–60 years), and this particular variant manifests with asymptomatic or mildly pruritic, hyperpigmented patches and plaques in intertriginous areas. Although it also shows hyperkeratosis on histopathology, it can be differentiated from granular parakeratosis by the additional findings of epidermal hypergranulosis, sawtooth acanthosis of rete ridges, apoptotic keratinocytes in the dermoepidermal junction, and lymphocytic infiltrate in the upper dermis.8
Hailey-Hailey disease (also known as familial benign pemphigus) is a rare condition caused by an autosomaldominant mutation affecting intracellular calcium signaling that impairs keratinocyte adhesion.9 Similar to granular parakeratosis, it is most common in middle-aged adults (aged 30–40 years) and manifests as pruritic and burning lesions in symmetric intertriginous areas that also can be triggered by heat and sweating. However, patients present with recurrent blistering and vesicular lesions that may lead to erosions and secondary infections, which reduced clinical suspicion for this diagnosis in our patient. Histopathology shows suprabasilar and intraepidermal clefts, full-thickness acantholysis, protruding dermal papillae, and a perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate in the superficial dermis.9
References
Ding CY, Liu H, Khachemoune A. Granular parakeratosis: a comprehensive review and a critical reappraisal. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2015;16:495-500. doi:10.1007/s40257-015-0148-2
Ip KH, Li A. Clinical features, histology, and treatment outcomes of granular parakeratosis: a systematic review. Int J Dermatol. 2022;61:973-978. doi:10.1111/ijd.16107
Mehregan DA, Thomas JE, Mehregan DR. Intertriginous granular parakeratosis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998;39:495-496. doi:10.1016/s0190-9622(98)70333-0
Kamada A, Saga K, Jimbow K. Apoeccrine sweat duct obstruction as a cause for Fox-Fordyce disease. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;48:453-455. doi:10.1067/mjd.2003.93
Salloum A, Bouferraa Y, Bazzi N, et al. Pathophysiology, clinical findings, and management of Fox-Fordyce disease: a systematic review. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022;21:482-500. doi:10.1111/jocd.14135
Sun MD, Halpern AC. Advances in the etiology, detection, and clinical management of seborrheic keratoses. Dermatology. 2022;238:205-217. doi:10.1159/000517070
Minagawa A. Dermoscopy-pathology relationship in seborrheic keratosis. J Dermatol. 2017;44:518-524. doi:10.1111/1346-8138.13657
Weston G, Payette M. Update on lichen planus and its clinical variants [published online September 16, 2015]. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2015;1:140-149. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2015.04.001
Ben Lagha I, Ashack K, Khachemoune A. Hailey-Hailey disease: an update review with a focus on treatment data. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020;21:49-68. doi:10.1007/s40257-019-00477-z
References
Ding CY, Liu H, Khachemoune A. Granular parakeratosis: a comprehensive review and a critical reappraisal. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2015;16:495-500. doi:10.1007/s40257-015-0148-2
Ip KH, Li A. Clinical features, histology, and treatment outcomes of granular parakeratosis: a systematic review. Int J Dermatol. 2022;61:973-978. doi:10.1111/ijd.16107
Mehregan DA, Thomas JE, Mehregan DR. Intertriginous granular parakeratosis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998;39:495-496. doi:10.1016/s0190-9622(98)70333-0
Kamada A, Saga K, Jimbow K. Apoeccrine sweat duct obstruction as a cause for Fox-Fordyce disease. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;48:453-455. doi:10.1067/mjd.2003.93
Salloum A, Bouferraa Y, Bazzi N, et al. Pathophysiology, clinical findings, and management of Fox-Fordyce disease: a systematic review. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022;21:482-500. doi:10.1111/jocd.14135
Sun MD, Halpern AC. Advances in the etiology, detection, and clinical management of seborrheic keratoses. Dermatology. 2022;238:205-217. doi:10.1159/000517070
Minagawa A. Dermoscopy-pathology relationship in seborrheic keratosis. J Dermatol. 2017;44:518-524. doi:10.1111/1346-8138.13657
Weston G, Payette M. Update on lichen planus and its clinical variants [published online September 16, 2015]. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2015;1:140-149. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2015.04.001
Ben Lagha I, Ashack K, Khachemoune A. Hailey-Hailey disease: an update review with a focus on treatment data. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020;21:49-68. doi:10.1007/s40257-019-00477-z
A 62-year-old woman presented to our clinic for evaluation of a brown plaque in the left axilla of 2 weeks’ duration. She had a history of a rotator cuff injury and adhesive capsulitis several months prior that required immobilization of the left arm in a shoulder orthosis for several months. After the sling was removed, she noticed the lesion and reported mild cutaneous pain. Physical examination revealed a 1.5-cm, verrucous, red-brown plaque in the left axillary vault. A shave biopsy of the plaque was performed.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Tue, 03/05/2024 - 08:00
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 03/05/2024 - 08:00
Consolidated Pubs: Do Not Show Source Publication Logo
A Danish study showing that about half of patients with newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had findings consistent with spondyloarthritis (SpA) was highlighted as one of last year’s more actionable studies on SpA and axial SpA (axSpa) at the 2024 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium (RWCS).
“There’s a lesson here,” said Eric M. Ruderman, MD, professor of medicine and associate chief of clinical affairs in the division of rheumatology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. “We’ve spent a lot of time working with the dermatologists in the last 10 years to try to coordinate what we’re doing [for psoriatic disease]. It’s time to start working with the gastroenterologists more.”
Dr. Eric M. Ruderman
The findings offer “more evidence” for an increasingly documented overlap of IBD with SpA — whether axial or peripheral — and suggest there is underdiagnosis of SpA among patients with IBD. “It’s important,” he said at the meeting, “because if there are meaningful joint symptoms, this should be considered when making treatment choices [for IBD],” just as rheumatologists must be aware of the potential for IBD in choosing therapies.
Dr. Ruderman also urged rheumatologists making treatment decisions for axSpA to more carefully consider the role of central pain in driving residual symptoms in patients on biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). He pointed to a 2023 study of patients with radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA) receiving bDMARDs that showed significant associations between high central pain and a greater odds of having higher disease activity, independent of elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) levels.
“I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s a huge amount of central pain in our patients — that it [affects] 20%-30% of our patients, no matter what rheumatologic disease they have,” he said, “and if you don’t acknowledge and consider that, you’ll keep churning through medications that aren’t going to work because you’re not addressing a fundamental issue.”
Among other key studies of 2023 highlighted by Dr. Ruderman was a large retrospective cohort study showing a similar incidence of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in US military men and women screened for chronic back pain and the GO-BACK withdrawal and retreatment trial of golimumab suggesting that dosing can be extended.
Meanwhile, last year brought more bad news for interleukin (IL)-23 inhibition in axSpA, with the termination of a phase 2 study of tildrakizumab (Ilumya). Good news came with the US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2023 of an intravenous formulation of the IL-17 inhibitor secukinumab (Cosentyx), which will be helpful for some Medicare patients. And moving forward, the biologic pipeline is SpA is “almost all about new pathways in the IL-17 arena,” Dr. Ruderman said.
Making Good Drug Choices for the Gut and the Joints
In the study of SpA among patients with IBD, reported at the EULAR 2023 meeting in Milan, Italy, rheumatologists assessed 110 consecutive patients — 34% of whom were diagnosed with Crohn’s disease and 59% of whom had ulcerative colitis — from a Danish IBD inception cohort. The patients, about 40% of whom were male, had a mean age of 42.
At the time of IBD diagnosis, 49% had arthralgias/musculoskeletal symptoms, 52% fulfilled Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) classification criteria for peripheral SpA, and 49% had synovitis and/or enthesitis verified by ultrasound, Dr. Ruderman said.
Gastroenterologists like the integrin antagonist vedolizumab (Entyvio) for some patients with IBD because “it’s a very gut-specific drug and doesn’t have as much impact on the systemic immune system as other drugs, but because it’s gut specific, it does nothing for peripheral or axial joint symptoms,” Dr. Ruderman said in an interview after the meeting. “We’ve seen patients switched to this drug from Humira [or other biologics] and suddenly they have joint pains they never had before.”
The IL-12/23 inhibitor ustekinumab (Stelara) and the IL-23 inhibitor risankizumab (Skyrizi) are also sometimes selected for IBD, but “neither work well for patients with confirmed axSpA or inflammatory axial spine pain and arthritis,” he said. “Maybe these patients belong on a TNF [tumor necrosis factor] inhibitor or a JAK [Janus kinase] inhibitor, which will manage both the joints and the gut.”
“It’s not that we don’t talk to one another, but as we get more and more drugs in this space — both us and the gastroenterologists — it behooves us to communicate better to make sure we’re making the right choices for patients,” Dr. Ruderman said in the interview.
On the flip side, there’s a clear link between patients with axSpA who have or later develop IBD, as was further documented in 2023 by a multicenter Spanish study that evaluated patients with SpA (including both radiographic and nonradiographic axSpA) for the prevalence of undiagnosed IBD, Dr. Ruderman said at the RWCS.
The study, reported at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2023 annual meeting, included only patients who were bDAMRD-naive and off of steroids for at least 30 days. The researchers used elevated fecal calprotectin levels (≥ 80 mcg/g) followed by colonoscopy — and an endoscopic capsule study or MRI if colonoscopy was normal — to confirm a diagnosis of IBD. Of 559 patients, 4.4% had such a confirmed diagnosis (95% with Crohn’s disease), and interestingly, only 30% of these patients had clinical IBD symptoms.
“These are people who had no suspicion,” Dr. Ruderman said at the meeting. “You could say that maybe not having symptoms is not a big deal, but over time, maybe there will be consequences.”
The IL-17 inhibitors ixekizumab (Taltz), secukinumab, and bimekizumab (Bimzelx) are generally felt to be contraindicated in patients who have confirmed IBD, Dr. Ruderman noted in the interview. “While we don’t want to necessarily avoid those drugs, we need to be aware of the potential [for IBD],” he said, “and we need to have a low threshold of suspicion if our patients develop any GI symptoms.”
Considering Noninflammatory Residual Pain
The 2023 central pain study that caught Dr. Ruderman’s attention — research reported at the EULAR 2023 meeting — looked at 70 patients with r-axSpA receiving bDMARD treatment (mostly TNF inhibitors) who were being followed in an extension of the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort. Investigators used the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) to help quantify central pain/central sensitization and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP) to measure disease activity.
“Central pain was actually associated with having residual symptoms,” Dr. Ruderman said at the RWCS. Higher WPI scores were significantly associated with higher ASDAS-CRP scores, and a high WPI was also associated with higher odds of having high or very high disease activity (ASDAS > 2.1), independent of other factors including elevated CRP, the investigators reported in their abstract.
Arthur Kavanaugh, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego, commented that “we don’t have great [non-opioid] treatments for pain,” prompting Dr. Ruderman to emphasize the importance of “resisting the urge to [automatically] switch to another biologic” without trying to discern whether residual pain is inflammatory or noninflammatory in nature.
“I’m really comfortable with this,” Dr. Ruderman said, noting that he prescribes drugs like duloxetine or pregabalin for suspected central pain. “For the statin (for cardiovascular disease prevention), I’m more likely to turn back to the primary care physician and work with them, but here it’s part of what we’re treating — it becomes part of our tool kits.”
The central pain issue, Dr. Ruderman said after the meeting, is one of recognition and nomenclature. In the last few years, “there’s been a tendency to get away from secondary fibromyalgia as a label. There’s a lot of baggage with the diagnosis, unfortunately,” he said in the interview. “And it’s all connected. … It’s very likely that the [central] pain signaling is triggered by the inflammatory pain in the first place.”
A New Look at Sex-Specific Incidence of AS
The study on AS in a retrospective cohort of 729,000 working-age US military service members “flew under the radar,” but its finding of a similar incidence in men and women who underwent screening for chronic back pain is “fascinating,” Dr. Ruderman said. Compared with females, men were not significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of AS (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02; P = .072), the researchers reported.
“We’ve always assumed that AS is a male disease, and that, as we got into nonradiographic axSpA, we would see more women. This study calls that into question,” he said.
More Light on bDMARD Dosage Extension and Withdrawal
The GO-BACK study of the TNF inhibitor golimumab (Simponi) randomized 188 patients with inactive nonradiographic axSpA after 6 months of 50 mg golimumab monthly to treatment withdrawal/monthly placebo, continued monthly treatment, or treatment every 2 months. The take-home message, Dr. Ruderman said, is that “withdrawal, but not reduction in dose, led to a higher risk of flare.”
Also notable in this study published in 2023 is that “almost 100% of those who flared were recaptured with the reinitiation of monthly dosing,” he said. “So you don’t lose if you try to stop … [although] I don’t think that will ever be a successful strategy.” (The proportion of patients without a disease flare over 12 months was 34% in the withdrawal group, 68% in the extended dosing group, and 84% in the continued monthly treatment group.)
Dosing extensions have been shown to be potentially viable with other biologics, “but with this one, it looks like you can spread it out almost with impunity because it doesn’t look like there’s much difference” between continuing monthly and extending, Dr. Kavanaugh commented.
Another study from 2023 of the IL-17A inhibitor ixekizumab in axSpA similarly showed a high recapture rate for patients who withdrew from therapy and then flared. In this phase 3 extension study in which 155 patients with inactive or low-level disease were randomized at week 24 to continued ixekizumab or placebo, 53% of placebo patients flared by 2 years, compared with 13% in the ixekizumab arm. Of those who flared, 96% recaptured low disease activity with re-initiation of therapy.
“It’s the same story. You might get away with [stopping the therapy] because it’s not 100% who flared. But is it worth it?” Dr. Ruderman said.
IL-23 Inhibition in Axial Disease and the Pipeline
Is the chapter on IL-23 inhibitors closed for axSpA? Aside from a possible role for axial disease in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), it likely is, Dr. Ruderman said, pointing to the phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of tildrakizumab in patients with AS that was terminated at week 24 after the drug showed no difference in efficacy from placebo.
Dr. Kavanaugh agreed. “This adds to the data on risankizumab and ustekinumab in studies done properly in AS,” he said. “There’s no benefit.”
The “real issue” still to be determined, said Dr. Ruderman, “is what is the role of IL-23 inhibitors in patients with axial PsA?”
A post-hoc analysis of data from the SELECT PsA 1 and 2 trials, published in 2023, showed greater improvement in the overall Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score in patients with axial disease who received 15 mg upadacitinib (Rinvoq), compared with placebo.
“It suggests there’s improvement in the patients with axial PsA as defined [by a high BASDAI score], but they didn’t compare this with patients without axial disease … it’s muddy,” Dr. Ruderman said. Other research that’s underway should provide clarity, Dr. Kavanaugh said.
The pipeline for new treatments for SpA, including axSpA, is focused on new biologics targeting the IL-17 pathways, as well as a fair number of targeted synthetics, Dr. Ruderman said. “What will be interesting to me is what happens with the TYK2 inhibitors … because one of the postulated mechanisms is that the IL-23 signals through TYK-2,” he said. “So if that’s the mechanism, will they really help our patients with axial disease? We need the trials to find out.”
The intravenous formulation of secukinumab, approved in 2023 for AS, nr-axSpA, and PsA, is a “nice addition to our armamentarium, Dr. Ruderman noted in his 2023 review. “For years, a patient doing well on an IL-17 inhibitor for their axial disease or their psoriatic disease would hit Medicare age and suddenly couldn’t afford subcutaneous administration, and we had to switch them over to an IV-TNF inhibitor,” he said. “Now we have an IV IL-17 inhibitor.”
A Danish study showing that about half of patients with newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had findings consistent with spondyloarthritis (SpA) was highlighted as one of last year’s more actionable studies on SpA and axial SpA (axSpa) at the 2024 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium (RWCS).
“There’s a lesson here,” said Eric M. Ruderman, MD, professor of medicine and associate chief of clinical affairs in the division of rheumatology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. “We’ve spent a lot of time working with the dermatologists in the last 10 years to try to coordinate what we’re doing [for psoriatic disease]. It’s time to start working with the gastroenterologists more.”
Dr. Eric M. Ruderman
The findings offer “more evidence” for an increasingly documented overlap of IBD with SpA — whether axial or peripheral — and suggest there is underdiagnosis of SpA among patients with IBD. “It’s important,” he said at the meeting, “because if there are meaningful joint symptoms, this should be considered when making treatment choices [for IBD],” just as rheumatologists must be aware of the potential for IBD in choosing therapies.
Dr. Ruderman also urged rheumatologists making treatment decisions for axSpA to more carefully consider the role of central pain in driving residual symptoms in patients on biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). He pointed to a 2023 study of patients with radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA) receiving bDMARDs that showed significant associations between high central pain and a greater odds of having higher disease activity, independent of elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) levels.
“I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s a huge amount of central pain in our patients — that it [affects] 20%-30% of our patients, no matter what rheumatologic disease they have,” he said, “and if you don’t acknowledge and consider that, you’ll keep churning through medications that aren’t going to work because you’re not addressing a fundamental issue.”
Among other key studies of 2023 highlighted by Dr. Ruderman was a large retrospective cohort study showing a similar incidence of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in US military men and women screened for chronic back pain and the GO-BACK withdrawal and retreatment trial of golimumab suggesting that dosing can be extended.
Meanwhile, last year brought more bad news for interleukin (IL)-23 inhibition in axSpA, with the termination of a phase 2 study of tildrakizumab (Ilumya). Good news came with the US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2023 of an intravenous formulation of the IL-17 inhibitor secukinumab (Cosentyx), which will be helpful for some Medicare patients. And moving forward, the biologic pipeline is SpA is “almost all about new pathways in the IL-17 arena,” Dr. Ruderman said.
Making Good Drug Choices for the Gut and the Joints
In the study of SpA among patients with IBD, reported at the EULAR 2023 meeting in Milan, Italy, rheumatologists assessed 110 consecutive patients — 34% of whom were diagnosed with Crohn’s disease and 59% of whom had ulcerative colitis — from a Danish IBD inception cohort. The patients, about 40% of whom were male, had a mean age of 42.
At the time of IBD diagnosis, 49% had arthralgias/musculoskeletal symptoms, 52% fulfilled Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) classification criteria for peripheral SpA, and 49% had synovitis and/or enthesitis verified by ultrasound, Dr. Ruderman said.
Gastroenterologists like the integrin antagonist vedolizumab (Entyvio) for some patients with IBD because “it’s a very gut-specific drug and doesn’t have as much impact on the systemic immune system as other drugs, but because it’s gut specific, it does nothing for peripheral or axial joint symptoms,” Dr. Ruderman said in an interview after the meeting. “We’ve seen patients switched to this drug from Humira [or other biologics] and suddenly they have joint pains they never had before.”
The IL-12/23 inhibitor ustekinumab (Stelara) and the IL-23 inhibitor risankizumab (Skyrizi) are also sometimes selected for IBD, but “neither work well for patients with confirmed axSpA or inflammatory axial spine pain and arthritis,” he said. “Maybe these patients belong on a TNF [tumor necrosis factor] inhibitor or a JAK [Janus kinase] inhibitor, which will manage both the joints and the gut.”
“It’s not that we don’t talk to one another, but as we get more and more drugs in this space — both us and the gastroenterologists — it behooves us to communicate better to make sure we’re making the right choices for patients,” Dr. Ruderman said in the interview.
On the flip side, there’s a clear link between patients with axSpA who have or later develop IBD, as was further documented in 2023 by a multicenter Spanish study that evaluated patients with SpA (including both radiographic and nonradiographic axSpA) for the prevalence of undiagnosed IBD, Dr. Ruderman said at the RWCS.
The study, reported at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2023 annual meeting, included only patients who were bDAMRD-naive and off of steroids for at least 30 days. The researchers used elevated fecal calprotectin levels (≥ 80 mcg/g) followed by colonoscopy — and an endoscopic capsule study or MRI if colonoscopy was normal — to confirm a diagnosis of IBD. Of 559 patients, 4.4% had such a confirmed diagnosis (95% with Crohn’s disease), and interestingly, only 30% of these patients had clinical IBD symptoms.
“These are people who had no suspicion,” Dr. Ruderman said at the meeting. “You could say that maybe not having symptoms is not a big deal, but over time, maybe there will be consequences.”
The IL-17 inhibitors ixekizumab (Taltz), secukinumab, and bimekizumab (Bimzelx) are generally felt to be contraindicated in patients who have confirmed IBD, Dr. Ruderman noted in the interview. “While we don’t want to necessarily avoid those drugs, we need to be aware of the potential [for IBD],” he said, “and we need to have a low threshold of suspicion if our patients develop any GI symptoms.”
Considering Noninflammatory Residual Pain
The 2023 central pain study that caught Dr. Ruderman’s attention — research reported at the EULAR 2023 meeting — looked at 70 patients with r-axSpA receiving bDMARD treatment (mostly TNF inhibitors) who were being followed in an extension of the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort. Investigators used the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) to help quantify central pain/central sensitization and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP) to measure disease activity.
“Central pain was actually associated with having residual symptoms,” Dr. Ruderman said at the RWCS. Higher WPI scores were significantly associated with higher ASDAS-CRP scores, and a high WPI was also associated with higher odds of having high or very high disease activity (ASDAS > 2.1), independent of other factors including elevated CRP, the investigators reported in their abstract.
Arthur Kavanaugh, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego, commented that “we don’t have great [non-opioid] treatments for pain,” prompting Dr. Ruderman to emphasize the importance of “resisting the urge to [automatically] switch to another biologic” without trying to discern whether residual pain is inflammatory or noninflammatory in nature.
“I’m really comfortable with this,” Dr. Ruderman said, noting that he prescribes drugs like duloxetine or pregabalin for suspected central pain. “For the statin (for cardiovascular disease prevention), I’m more likely to turn back to the primary care physician and work with them, but here it’s part of what we’re treating — it becomes part of our tool kits.”
The central pain issue, Dr. Ruderman said after the meeting, is one of recognition and nomenclature. In the last few years, “there’s been a tendency to get away from secondary fibromyalgia as a label. There’s a lot of baggage with the diagnosis, unfortunately,” he said in the interview. “And it’s all connected. … It’s very likely that the [central] pain signaling is triggered by the inflammatory pain in the first place.”
A New Look at Sex-Specific Incidence of AS
The study on AS in a retrospective cohort of 729,000 working-age US military service members “flew under the radar,” but its finding of a similar incidence in men and women who underwent screening for chronic back pain is “fascinating,” Dr. Ruderman said. Compared with females, men were not significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of AS (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02; P = .072), the researchers reported.
“We’ve always assumed that AS is a male disease, and that, as we got into nonradiographic axSpA, we would see more women. This study calls that into question,” he said.
More Light on bDMARD Dosage Extension and Withdrawal
The GO-BACK study of the TNF inhibitor golimumab (Simponi) randomized 188 patients with inactive nonradiographic axSpA after 6 months of 50 mg golimumab monthly to treatment withdrawal/monthly placebo, continued monthly treatment, or treatment every 2 months. The take-home message, Dr. Ruderman said, is that “withdrawal, but not reduction in dose, led to a higher risk of flare.”
Also notable in this study published in 2023 is that “almost 100% of those who flared were recaptured with the reinitiation of monthly dosing,” he said. “So you don’t lose if you try to stop … [although] I don’t think that will ever be a successful strategy.” (The proportion of patients without a disease flare over 12 months was 34% in the withdrawal group, 68% in the extended dosing group, and 84% in the continued monthly treatment group.)
Dosing extensions have been shown to be potentially viable with other biologics, “but with this one, it looks like you can spread it out almost with impunity because it doesn’t look like there’s much difference” between continuing monthly and extending, Dr. Kavanaugh commented.
Another study from 2023 of the IL-17A inhibitor ixekizumab in axSpA similarly showed a high recapture rate for patients who withdrew from therapy and then flared. In this phase 3 extension study in which 155 patients with inactive or low-level disease were randomized at week 24 to continued ixekizumab or placebo, 53% of placebo patients flared by 2 years, compared with 13% in the ixekizumab arm. Of those who flared, 96% recaptured low disease activity with re-initiation of therapy.
“It’s the same story. You might get away with [stopping the therapy] because it’s not 100% who flared. But is it worth it?” Dr. Ruderman said.
IL-23 Inhibition in Axial Disease and the Pipeline
Is the chapter on IL-23 inhibitors closed for axSpA? Aside from a possible role for axial disease in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), it likely is, Dr. Ruderman said, pointing to the phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of tildrakizumab in patients with AS that was terminated at week 24 after the drug showed no difference in efficacy from placebo.
Dr. Kavanaugh agreed. “This adds to the data on risankizumab and ustekinumab in studies done properly in AS,” he said. “There’s no benefit.”
The “real issue” still to be determined, said Dr. Ruderman, “is what is the role of IL-23 inhibitors in patients with axial PsA?”
A post-hoc analysis of data from the SELECT PsA 1 and 2 trials, published in 2023, showed greater improvement in the overall Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score in patients with axial disease who received 15 mg upadacitinib (Rinvoq), compared with placebo.
“It suggests there’s improvement in the patients with axial PsA as defined [by a high BASDAI score], but they didn’t compare this with patients without axial disease … it’s muddy,” Dr. Ruderman said. Other research that’s underway should provide clarity, Dr. Kavanaugh said.
The pipeline for new treatments for SpA, including axSpA, is focused on new biologics targeting the IL-17 pathways, as well as a fair number of targeted synthetics, Dr. Ruderman said. “What will be interesting to me is what happens with the TYK2 inhibitors … because one of the postulated mechanisms is that the IL-23 signals through TYK-2,” he said. “So if that’s the mechanism, will they really help our patients with axial disease? We need the trials to find out.”
The intravenous formulation of secukinumab, approved in 2023 for AS, nr-axSpA, and PsA, is a “nice addition to our armamentarium, Dr. Ruderman noted in his 2023 review. “For years, a patient doing well on an IL-17 inhibitor for their axial disease or their psoriatic disease would hit Medicare age and suddenly couldn’t afford subcutaneous administration, and we had to switch them over to an IV-TNF inhibitor,” he said. “Now we have an IV IL-17 inhibitor.”
A Danish study showing that about half of patients with newly diagnosed inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) had findings consistent with spondyloarthritis (SpA) was highlighted as one of last year’s more actionable studies on SpA and axial SpA (axSpa) at the 2024 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium (RWCS).
“There’s a lesson here,” said Eric M. Ruderman, MD, professor of medicine and associate chief of clinical affairs in the division of rheumatology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. “We’ve spent a lot of time working with the dermatologists in the last 10 years to try to coordinate what we’re doing [for psoriatic disease]. It’s time to start working with the gastroenterologists more.”
Dr. Eric M. Ruderman
The findings offer “more evidence” for an increasingly documented overlap of IBD with SpA — whether axial or peripheral — and suggest there is underdiagnosis of SpA among patients with IBD. “It’s important,” he said at the meeting, “because if there are meaningful joint symptoms, this should be considered when making treatment choices [for IBD],” just as rheumatologists must be aware of the potential for IBD in choosing therapies.
Dr. Ruderman also urged rheumatologists making treatment decisions for axSpA to more carefully consider the role of central pain in driving residual symptoms in patients on biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). He pointed to a 2023 study of patients with radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA) receiving bDMARDs that showed significant associations between high central pain and a greater odds of having higher disease activity, independent of elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) levels.
“I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s a huge amount of central pain in our patients — that it [affects] 20%-30% of our patients, no matter what rheumatologic disease they have,” he said, “and if you don’t acknowledge and consider that, you’ll keep churning through medications that aren’t going to work because you’re not addressing a fundamental issue.”
Among other key studies of 2023 highlighted by Dr. Ruderman was a large retrospective cohort study showing a similar incidence of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in US military men and women screened for chronic back pain and the GO-BACK withdrawal and retreatment trial of golimumab suggesting that dosing can be extended.
Meanwhile, last year brought more bad news for interleukin (IL)-23 inhibition in axSpA, with the termination of a phase 2 study of tildrakizumab (Ilumya). Good news came with the US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2023 of an intravenous formulation of the IL-17 inhibitor secukinumab (Cosentyx), which will be helpful for some Medicare patients. And moving forward, the biologic pipeline is SpA is “almost all about new pathways in the IL-17 arena,” Dr. Ruderman said.
Making Good Drug Choices for the Gut and the Joints
In the study of SpA among patients with IBD, reported at the EULAR 2023 meeting in Milan, Italy, rheumatologists assessed 110 consecutive patients — 34% of whom were diagnosed with Crohn’s disease and 59% of whom had ulcerative colitis — from a Danish IBD inception cohort. The patients, about 40% of whom were male, had a mean age of 42.
At the time of IBD diagnosis, 49% had arthralgias/musculoskeletal symptoms, 52% fulfilled Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) classification criteria for peripheral SpA, and 49% had synovitis and/or enthesitis verified by ultrasound, Dr. Ruderman said.
Gastroenterologists like the integrin antagonist vedolizumab (Entyvio) for some patients with IBD because “it’s a very gut-specific drug and doesn’t have as much impact on the systemic immune system as other drugs, but because it’s gut specific, it does nothing for peripheral or axial joint symptoms,” Dr. Ruderman said in an interview after the meeting. “We’ve seen patients switched to this drug from Humira [or other biologics] and suddenly they have joint pains they never had before.”
The IL-12/23 inhibitor ustekinumab (Stelara) and the IL-23 inhibitor risankizumab (Skyrizi) are also sometimes selected for IBD, but “neither work well for patients with confirmed axSpA or inflammatory axial spine pain and arthritis,” he said. “Maybe these patients belong on a TNF [tumor necrosis factor] inhibitor or a JAK [Janus kinase] inhibitor, which will manage both the joints and the gut.”
“It’s not that we don’t talk to one another, but as we get more and more drugs in this space — both us and the gastroenterologists — it behooves us to communicate better to make sure we’re making the right choices for patients,” Dr. Ruderman said in the interview.
On the flip side, there’s a clear link between patients with axSpA who have or later develop IBD, as was further documented in 2023 by a multicenter Spanish study that evaluated patients with SpA (including both radiographic and nonradiographic axSpA) for the prevalence of undiagnosed IBD, Dr. Ruderman said at the RWCS.
The study, reported at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2023 annual meeting, included only patients who were bDAMRD-naive and off of steroids for at least 30 days. The researchers used elevated fecal calprotectin levels (≥ 80 mcg/g) followed by colonoscopy — and an endoscopic capsule study or MRI if colonoscopy was normal — to confirm a diagnosis of IBD. Of 559 patients, 4.4% had such a confirmed diagnosis (95% with Crohn’s disease), and interestingly, only 30% of these patients had clinical IBD symptoms.
“These are people who had no suspicion,” Dr. Ruderman said at the meeting. “You could say that maybe not having symptoms is not a big deal, but over time, maybe there will be consequences.”
The IL-17 inhibitors ixekizumab (Taltz), secukinumab, and bimekizumab (Bimzelx) are generally felt to be contraindicated in patients who have confirmed IBD, Dr. Ruderman noted in the interview. “While we don’t want to necessarily avoid those drugs, we need to be aware of the potential [for IBD],” he said, “and we need to have a low threshold of suspicion if our patients develop any GI symptoms.”
Considering Noninflammatory Residual Pain
The 2023 central pain study that caught Dr. Ruderman’s attention — research reported at the EULAR 2023 meeting — looked at 70 patients with r-axSpA receiving bDMARD treatment (mostly TNF inhibitors) who were being followed in an extension of the German Spondyloarthritis Inception Cohort. Investigators used the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) to help quantify central pain/central sensitization and the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (ASDAS-CRP) to measure disease activity.
“Central pain was actually associated with having residual symptoms,” Dr. Ruderman said at the RWCS. Higher WPI scores were significantly associated with higher ASDAS-CRP scores, and a high WPI was also associated with higher odds of having high or very high disease activity (ASDAS > 2.1), independent of other factors including elevated CRP, the investigators reported in their abstract.
Arthur Kavanaugh, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego, commented that “we don’t have great [non-opioid] treatments for pain,” prompting Dr. Ruderman to emphasize the importance of “resisting the urge to [automatically] switch to another biologic” without trying to discern whether residual pain is inflammatory or noninflammatory in nature.
“I’m really comfortable with this,” Dr. Ruderman said, noting that he prescribes drugs like duloxetine or pregabalin for suspected central pain. “For the statin (for cardiovascular disease prevention), I’m more likely to turn back to the primary care physician and work with them, but here it’s part of what we’re treating — it becomes part of our tool kits.”
The central pain issue, Dr. Ruderman said after the meeting, is one of recognition and nomenclature. In the last few years, “there’s been a tendency to get away from secondary fibromyalgia as a label. There’s a lot of baggage with the diagnosis, unfortunately,” he said in the interview. “And it’s all connected. … It’s very likely that the [central] pain signaling is triggered by the inflammatory pain in the first place.”
A New Look at Sex-Specific Incidence of AS
The study on AS in a retrospective cohort of 729,000 working-age US military service members “flew under the radar,” but its finding of a similar incidence in men and women who underwent screening for chronic back pain is “fascinating,” Dr. Ruderman said. Compared with females, men were not significantly more likely to have a diagnosis of AS (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02; P = .072), the researchers reported.
“We’ve always assumed that AS is a male disease, and that, as we got into nonradiographic axSpA, we would see more women. This study calls that into question,” he said.
More Light on bDMARD Dosage Extension and Withdrawal
The GO-BACK study of the TNF inhibitor golimumab (Simponi) randomized 188 patients with inactive nonradiographic axSpA after 6 months of 50 mg golimumab monthly to treatment withdrawal/monthly placebo, continued monthly treatment, or treatment every 2 months. The take-home message, Dr. Ruderman said, is that “withdrawal, but not reduction in dose, led to a higher risk of flare.”
Also notable in this study published in 2023 is that “almost 100% of those who flared were recaptured with the reinitiation of monthly dosing,” he said. “So you don’t lose if you try to stop … [although] I don’t think that will ever be a successful strategy.” (The proportion of patients without a disease flare over 12 months was 34% in the withdrawal group, 68% in the extended dosing group, and 84% in the continued monthly treatment group.)
Dosing extensions have been shown to be potentially viable with other biologics, “but with this one, it looks like you can spread it out almost with impunity because it doesn’t look like there’s much difference” between continuing monthly and extending, Dr. Kavanaugh commented.
Another study from 2023 of the IL-17A inhibitor ixekizumab in axSpA similarly showed a high recapture rate for patients who withdrew from therapy and then flared. In this phase 3 extension study in which 155 patients with inactive or low-level disease were randomized at week 24 to continued ixekizumab or placebo, 53% of placebo patients flared by 2 years, compared with 13% in the ixekizumab arm. Of those who flared, 96% recaptured low disease activity with re-initiation of therapy.
“It’s the same story. You might get away with [stopping the therapy] because it’s not 100% who flared. But is it worth it?” Dr. Ruderman said.
IL-23 Inhibition in Axial Disease and the Pipeline
Is the chapter on IL-23 inhibitors closed for axSpA? Aside from a possible role for axial disease in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), it likely is, Dr. Ruderman said, pointing to the phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of tildrakizumab in patients with AS that was terminated at week 24 after the drug showed no difference in efficacy from placebo.
Dr. Kavanaugh agreed. “This adds to the data on risankizumab and ustekinumab in studies done properly in AS,” he said. “There’s no benefit.”
The “real issue” still to be determined, said Dr. Ruderman, “is what is the role of IL-23 inhibitors in patients with axial PsA?”
A post-hoc analysis of data from the SELECT PsA 1 and 2 trials, published in 2023, showed greater improvement in the overall Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score in patients with axial disease who received 15 mg upadacitinib (Rinvoq), compared with placebo.
“It suggests there’s improvement in the patients with axial PsA as defined [by a high BASDAI score], but they didn’t compare this with patients without axial disease … it’s muddy,” Dr. Ruderman said. Other research that’s underway should provide clarity, Dr. Kavanaugh said.
The pipeline for new treatments for SpA, including axSpA, is focused on new biologics targeting the IL-17 pathways, as well as a fair number of targeted synthetics, Dr. Ruderman said. “What will be interesting to me is what happens with the TYK2 inhibitors … because one of the postulated mechanisms is that the IL-23 signals through TYK-2,” he said. “So if that’s the mechanism, will they really help our patients with axial disease? We need the trials to find out.”
The intravenous formulation of secukinumab, approved in 2023 for AS, nr-axSpA, and PsA, is a “nice addition to our armamentarium, Dr. Ruderman noted in his 2023 review. “For years, a patient doing well on an IL-17 inhibitor for their axial disease or their psoriatic disease would hit Medicare age and suddenly couldn’t afford subcutaneous administration, and we had to switch them over to an IV-TNF inhibitor,” he said. “Now we have an IV IL-17 inhibitor.”
Soot, or in scientific parlance “fine particulate matter,” isn’t just the stuff that blackens window sills or dulls car finishes — it’s a serious health hazard, linked to cardiopulmonary disease, asthma, allergies, and lung cancer, as well as a host of other harmful conditions.
Until recently, the annual ambient air quality standard established by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was a maximum of 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air of fine particles smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5).
But on February 7, 2024, the EPA announced that the Biden-Harris administration had finalized a new standard of 9 mcg PM2.5/per cubic meter of air.
In addition, the EPA reported that it will be modifying its PM2.5 monitoring network to include a factor that will account for the proximity to pollution sources of at-risk populations.
In a press release, the EPA said that the modification “will advance environmental justice by ensuring localized data collection in overburdened areas,” with the goal of informing future National Ambient Air Quality Standards reviews.
In a statement supporting the new standard, Environment America, a network of 30 state environmental groups, noted that in “the United States, the largest human-caused sources of soot pollution are fossil fuels — coal, oil, and gas — burned for electricity and transportation. Since the government last updated its standards, new research has found there may be no safe amount of air pollution and the World Health Organization cut in half its guidelines for allowable particulate matter (soot) pollution. The final rule lowers allowable soot limits for annual exposure by 25%, although it leaves the 24-hour limit unchanged, allowing for temporary pollution spikes.”
A Good Start
Pulmonologists interviewed for this article also applauded the tightened PM2.5 standard, but said that the change doesn’t go far enough.
“We know that particulate matter, also called particulate pollution, is the most dangerous form of air pollution, and there has been an extensive body of literature which outlines the negative impact of air pollution and poor air quality not only on respiratory health, but also on cardiovascular disease, premature pregnancies, mental health, and death,” Anne C. Coates, MD, FCCP, a pediatric pulmonologist at MaineHealth in Portland, Maine, said in an interview with this news organization.
“Lowering the limits certainly can help promote overall health as well as reduce asthma, COPD exacerbations, heart attacks, hospitalizations and death,” she said.
However “I wish that the EPA had gone further to address lowering the daily particulate matter standards because, remember, what they issued on February 7th was the reduction in the annual particulate matter,” she noted.
With the tighter standards, “things are going the right way,” said Priya Balakrishnan, MD, MS, FCCP, assistant professor in the Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at West Virginia University in Morgantown.
Following Trump administration efforts to weaken regulatory authority and reverse environmental regulations promulgated under President Obama, “this is the first kind of positive legislation moving forward,” she said in an interview with this news organization.
“Obviously, it’s not ideal, because it’s just monitoring the annual particulate matter 2.5 levels rather than daily ones, but it’s still a change in the right direction,” she said.
Deadly Air
As Dr. Coates and Dr. Balakrishnan noted, the revised ambient air standard is averaged over a year, and as such may not accurately capture periods where particulate matter concentrations are dangerously high, as occurs in many US states and Canadian provinces during wildfire season, or when one of the more than 200 remaining coal-fired power plants in the US release clouds of soot during daily operations or especially during periods of high electricity demand.
Some pollution sources are worse than others, as shown by a study published in the November 24, 2023, issue of Science. Health and environmental investigators reported that among Medicare beneficiaries, exposure to PM2.5 from sulfur dioxide released by coal burning for electricity generation was associated with a doubling in risk of death compared to PM2.5 exposure from all other sources.
Air pollution has also been identified as a key factor in the development of non–small cell lung cancer in nonsmokers, according to Charles Swanton, PhD, of the Francis Crick Institute, and chief clinician of Cancer Research UK, both in London, and his colleagues.
As Dr. Swanton reported at the 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, among 447,932 participants in the UK Biobank, increasing exposure to PM2.5 was significantly associated with seven cancer types, including lung cancer. They also saw an association between PM2.5 exposure levels and EGFR-mutated lung cancer incidence in the United Kingdom, South Korea, and Taiwan.
And as the investigators showed in mouse models, exposure to PM2.5 of lung cells bearing somatic EGFR and KRAS mutations causes recruitment of macrophages that in turn secrete interleukin-1B, resulting in a transdifferentiation of EGFR-mutated cells into a cancer stem cell state, and tumor formation.
Monitoring At-Risk Communities
Lisa Frank, executive director of the Washington legislative office of Environment America, explained in an interview how the revised standards may result in improvements in air quality, especially for at-risk populations such as lower-income urban dwellers.
“Regulations on particulate matter have been around for a few decades now, so there’s an established process that the state agencies and the EPA go through to make sure that air quality standards are met,” she said.
Over the next several years, the EPA will designate areas of the United States as either being in “attainment” (meeting primary or secondary ambient air quality standards) or in “nonattainment.”
“After that, implementation is up to the state and local air boards. They all are required to have a certain number of air quality monitors to keep track of pollution and they also handle reviewing permits for new construction, highways or other projects in that county that might affect air pollution,” she said.
Depending upon their size, counties are required under federal law to have air-quality monitoring sites in areas that are likely to have the worst air quality, such as major highways or urban traffic corridors.
Under the revised regulations, counties will be expected to have air-quality monitoring stations in or near at-risk communities, which should help to mitigate inequities that arise from proximity of polluting power plants in less-advantaged locations, Ms. Frank said.
“I think obviously any improvement in air quality is going to benefit everyone who breathes there, which I hope is all of us, but certainly people who already have the most air pollution hopefully should see bigger gains as well,” she said.
All persons interviewed for this article reported no relevant conflicts of interest. Dr. Coates and Dr. Balakrishnan are members of the editorial advisory board for CHEST Physician.
Soot, or in scientific parlance “fine particulate matter,” isn’t just the stuff that blackens window sills or dulls car finishes — it’s a serious health hazard, linked to cardiopulmonary disease, asthma, allergies, and lung cancer, as well as a host of other harmful conditions.
Until recently, the annual ambient air quality standard established by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was a maximum of 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air of fine particles smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5).
But on February 7, 2024, the EPA announced that the Biden-Harris administration had finalized a new standard of 9 mcg PM2.5/per cubic meter of air.
In addition, the EPA reported that it will be modifying its PM2.5 monitoring network to include a factor that will account for the proximity to pollution sources of at-risk populations.
In a press release, the EPA said that the modification “will advance environmental justice by ensuring localized data collection in overburdened areas,” with the goal of informing future National Ambient Air Quality Standards reviews.
In a statement supporting the new standard, Environment America, a network of 30 state environmental groups, noted that in “the United States, the largest human-caused sources of soot pollution are fossil fuels — coal, oil, and gas — burned for electricity and transportation. Since the government last updated its standards, new research has found there may be no safe amount of air pollution and the World Health Organization cut in half its guidelines for allowable particulate matter (soot) pollution. The final rule lowers allowable soot limits for annual exposure by 25%, although it leaves the 24-hour limit unchanged, allowing for temporary pollution spikes.”
A Good Start
Pulmonologists interviewed for this article also applauded the tightened PM2.5 standard, but said that the change doesn’t go far enough.
“We know that particulate matter, also called particulate pollution, is the most dangerous form of air pollution, and there has been an extensive body of literature which outlines the negative impact of air pollution and poor air quality not only on respiratory health, but also on cardiovascular disease, premature pregnancies, mental health, and death,” Anne C. Coates, MD, FCCP, a pediatric pulmonologist at MaineHealth in Portland, Maine, said in an interview with this news organization.
“Lowering the limits certainly can help promote overall health as well as reduce asthma, COPD exacerbations, heart attacks, hospitalizations and death,” she said.
However “I wish that the EPA had gone further to address lowering the daily particulate matter standards because, remember, what they issued on February 7th was the reduction in the annual particulate matter,” she noted.
With the tighter standards, “things are going the right way,” said Priya Balakrishnan, MD, MS, FCCP, assistant professor in the Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at West Virginia University in Morgantown.
Following Trump administration efforts to weaken regulatory authority and reverse environmental regulations promulgated under President Obama, “this is the first kind of positive legislation moving forward,” she said in an interview with this news organization.
“Obviously, it’s not ideal, because it’s just monitoring the annual particulate matter 2.5 levels rather than daily ones, but it’s still a change in the right direction,” she said.
Deadly Air
As Dr. Coates and Dr. Balakrishnan noted, the revised ambient air standard is averaged over a year, and as such may not accurately capture periods where particulate matter concentrations are dangerously high, as occurs in many US states and Canadian provinces during wildfire season, or when one of the more than 200 remaining coal-fired power plants in the US release clouds of soot during daily operations or especially during periods of high electricity demand.
Some pollution sources are worse than others, as shown by a study published in the November 24, 2023, issue of Science. Health and environmental investigators reported that among Medicare beneficiaries, exposure to PM2.5 from sulfur dioxide released by coal burning for electricity generation was associated with a doubling in risk of death compared to PM2.5 exposure from all other sources.
Air pollution has also been identified as a key factor in the development of non–small cell lung cancer in nonsmokers, according to Charles Swanton, PhD, of the Francis Crick Institute, and chief clinician of Cancer Research UK, both in London, and his colleagues.
As Dr. Swanton reported at the 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, among 447,932 participants in the UK Biobank, increasing exposure to PM2.5 was significantly associated with seven cancer types, including lung cancer. They also saw an association between PM2.5 exposure levels and EGFR-mutated lung cancer incidence in the United Kingdom, South Korea, and Taiwan.
And as the investigators showed in mouse models, exposure to PM2.5 of lung cells bearing somatic EGFR and KRAS mutations causes recruitment of macrophages that in turn secrete interleukin-1B, resulting in a transdifferentiation of EGFR-mutated cells into a cancer stem cell state, and tumor formation.
Monitoring At-Risk Communities
Lisa Frank, executive director of the Washington legislative office of Environment America, explained in an interview how the revised standards may result in improvements in air quality, especially for at-risk populations such as lower-income urban dwellers.
“Regulations on particulate matter have been around for a few decades now, so there’s an established process that the state agencies and the EPA go through to make sure that air quality standards are met,” she said.
Over the next several years, the EPA will designate areas of the United States as either being in “attainment” (meeting primary or secondary ambient air quality standards) or in “nonattainment.”
“After that, implementation is up to the state and local air boards. They all are required to have a certain number of air quality monitors to keep track of pollution and they also handle reviewing permits for new construction, highways or other projects in that county that might affect air pollution,” she said.
Depending upon their size, counties are required under federal law to have air-quality monitoring sites in areas that are likely to have the worst air quality, such as major highways or urban traffic corridors.
Under the revised regulations, counties will be expected to have air-quality monitoring stations in or near at-risk communities, which should help to mitigate inequities that arise from proximity of polluting power plants in less-advantaged locations, Ms. Frank said.
“I think obviously any improvement in air quality is going to benefit everyone who breathes there, which I hope is all of us, but certainly people who already have the most air pollution hopefully should see bigger gains as well,” she said.
All persons interviewed for this article reported no relevant conflicts of interest. Dr. Coates and Dr. Balakrishnan are members of the editorial advisory board for CHEST Physician.
Soot, or in scientific parlance “fine particulate matter,” isn’t just the stuff that blackens window sills or dulls car finishes — it’s a serious health hazard, linked to cardiopulmonary disease, asthma, allergies, and lung cancer, as well as a host of other harmful conditions.
Until recently, the annual ambient air quality standard established by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was a maximum of 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air of fine particles smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5).
But on February 7, 2024, the EPA announced that the Biden-Harris administration had finalized a new standard of 9 mcg PM2.5/per cubic meter of air.
In addition, the EPA reported that it will be modifying its PM2.5 monitoring network to include a factor that will account for the proximity to pollution sources of at-risk populations.
In a press release, the EPA said that the modification “will advance environmental justice by ensuring localized data collection in overburdened areas,” with the goal of informing future National Ambient Air Quality Standards reviews.
In a statement supporting the new standard, Environment America, a network of 30 state environmental groups, noted that in “the United States, the largest human-caused sources of soot pollution are fossil fuels — coal, oil, and gas — burned for electricity and transportation. Since the government last updated its standards, new research has found there may be no safe amount of air pollution and the World Health Organization cut in half its guidelines for allowable particulate matter (soot) pollution. The final rule lowers allowable soot limits for annual exposure by 25%, although it leaves the 24-hour limit unchanged, allowing for temporary pollution spikes.”
A Good Start
Pulmonologists interviewed for this article also applauded the tightened PM2.5 standard, but said that the change doesn’t go far enough.
“We know that particulate matter, also called particulate pollution, is the most dangerous form of air pollution, and there has been an extensive body of literature which outlines the negative impact of air pollution and poor air quality not only on respiratory health, but also on cardiovascular disease, premature pregnancies, mental health, and death,” Anne C. Coates, MD, FCCP, a pediatric pulmonologist at MaineHealth in Portland, Maine, said in an interview with this news organization.
“Lowering the limits certainly can help promote overall health as well as reduce asthma, COPD exacerbations, heart attacks, hospitalizations and death,” she said.
However “I wish that the EPA had gone further to address lowering the daily particulate matter standards because, remember, what they issued on February 7th was the reduction in the annual particulate matter,” she noted.
With the tighter standards, “things are going the right way,” said Priya Balakrishnan, MD, MS, FCCP, assistant professor in the Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at West Virginia University in Morgantown.
Following Trump administration efforts to weaken regulatory authority and reverse environmental regulations promulgated under President Obama, “this is the first kind of positive legislation moving forward,” she said in an interview with this news organization.
“Obviously, it’s not ideal, because it’s just monitoring the annual particulate matter 2.5 levels rather than daily ones, but it’s still a change in the right direction,” she said.
Deadly Air
As Dr. Coates and Dr. Balakrishnan noted, the revised ambient air standard is averaged over a year, and as such may not accurately capture periods where particulate matter concentrations are dangerously high, as occurs in many US states and Canadian provinces during wildfire season, or when one of the more than 200 remaining coal-fired power plants in the US release clouds of soot during daily operations or especially during periods of high electricity demand.
Some pollution sources are worse than others, as shown by a study published in the November 24, 2023, issue of Science. Health and environmental investigators reported that among Medicare beneficiaries, exposure to PM2.5 from sulfur dioxide released by coal burning for electricity generation was associated with a doubling in risk of death compared to PM2.5 exposure from all other sources.
Air pollution has also been identified as a key factor in the development of non–small cell lung cancer in nonsmokers, according to Charles Swanton, PhD, of the Francis Crick Institute, and chief clinician of Cancer Research UK, both in London, and his colleagues.
As Dr. Swanton reported at the 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology Congress, among 447,932 participants in the UK Biobank, increasing exposure to PM2.5 was significantly associated with seven cancer types, including lung cancer. They also saw an association between PM2.5 exposure levels and EGFR-mutated lung cancer incidence in the United Kingdom, South Korea, and Taiwan.
And as the investigators showed in mouse models, exposure to PM2.5 of lung cells bearing somatic EGFR and KRAS mutations causes recruitment of macrophages that in turn secrete interleukin-1B, resulting in a transdifferentiation of EGFR-mutated cells into a cancer stem cell state, and tumor formation.
Monitoring At-Risk Communities
Lisa Frank, executive director of the Washington legislative office of Environment America, explained in an interview how the revised standards may result in improvements in air quality, especially for at-risk populations such as lower-income urban dwellers.
“Regulations on particulate matter have been around for a few decades now, so there’s an established process that the state agencies and the EPA go through to make sure that air quality standards are met,” she said.
Over the next several years, the EPA will designate areas of the United States as either being in “attainment” (meeting primary or secondary ambient air quality standards) or in “nonattainment.”
“After that, implementation is up to the state and local air boards. They all are required to have a certain number of air quality monitors to keep track of pollution and they also handle reviewing permits for new construction, highways or other projects in that county that might affect air pollution,” she said.
Depending upon their size, counties are required under federal law to have air-quality monitoring sites in areas that are likely to have the worst air quality, such as major highways or urban traffic corridors.
Under the revised regulations, counties will be expected to have air-quality monitoring stations in or near at-risk communities, which should help to mitigate inequities that arise from proximity of polluting power plants in less-advantaged locations, Ms. Frank said.
“I think obviously any improvement in air quality is going to benefit everyone who breathes there, which I hope is all of us, but certainly people who already have the most air pollution hopefully should see bigger gains as well,” she said.
All persons interviewed for this article reported no relevant conflicts of interest. Dr. Coates and Dr. Balakrishnan are members of the editorial advisory board for CHEST Physician.
Viral infections frequently cause acute respiratory failure requiring ICU admission. In the United States, influenza causes over 50,000 deaths annually and SARS-CoV2 resulted in 170,000 hospitalizations in December 2023 alone.1 2 RSV lacks precise incidence data due to inconsistent testing but is increasingly implicated in respiratory failure.
Patients with underlying pulmonary comorbidities are at increased risk of severe infection. RSV induces bronchospasm and increases the risk for severe infection in patients with obstructive lung disease.3 Additionally, COPD patients with viral respiratory infections have higher rates of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and death compared with similar patients admitted for other etiologies.4
Diagnosis typically is achieved with nasopharyngeal PCR swabs. Positive viral swabs correlate with higher ICU admission and ventilation rates in patients with COPD.4 Coinfection with multiple respiratory viruses leads to higher mortality rates and bacterial and fungal coinfection further increases morbidity and mortality.5
Treatment includes respiratory support with noninvasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula, reducing the need for mechanical ventilation.6 Inhaled bronchodilators are particularly beneficial in patients with RSV infection.5 Oseltamivir reduces mortality in severe influenza cases, while remdesivir shows efficacy in SARS-CoV2 infection not requiring invasive ventilation.7 Severe SARS-CoV2 infection can be treated with immunomodulators. However, their availability is limited. Corticosteroids reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with SARS-CoV2; however, their use is associated with worse outcomes in influenza and RSV.7 8
Vaccination remains crucial for prevention of severe disease. RSV vaccination, in addition to influenza and SARS-CoV2 immunization, presents an opportunity to reduce morbidity and mortality.
References
1. Troeger C, et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18[11]:1191-1210.
2. WHO COVID-19 Epidemiological Update, 2024.
3. Coussement J, et al. Chest. 2022;161[6]:1475-1484.
4. Mulpuru S, et al. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2022;16[6]:1172-1182.
5. Saura O, et al. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2022;20[12]:1537-1550.
6. Inglis R, Ayebale E, Schultz MJ. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2019;25[1]:45-53.
7. O’Driscoll LS, Martin-Loeches I. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;42[6]:771-787.
Viral infections frequently cause acute respiratory failure requiring ICU admission. In the United States, influenza causes over 50,000 deaths annually and SARS-CoV2 resulted in 170,000 hospitalizations in December 2023 alone.1 2 RSV lacks precise incidence data due to inconsistent testing but is increasingly implicated in respiratory failure.
Patients with underlying pulmonary comorbidities are at increased risk of severe infection. RSV induces bronchospasm and increases the risk for severe infection in patients with obstructive lung disease.3 Additionally, COPD patients with viral respiratory infections have higher rates of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and death compared with similar patients admitted for other etiologies.4
Diagnosis typically is achieved with nasopharyngeal PCR swabs. Positive viral swabs correlate with higher ICU admission and ventilation rates in patients with COPD.4 Coinfection with multiple respiratory viruses leads to higher mortality rates and bacterial and fungal coinfection further increases morbidity and mortality.5
Treatment includes respiratory support with noninvasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula, reducing the need for mechanical ventilation.6 Inhaled bronchodilators are particularly beneficial in patients with RSV infection.5 Oseltamivir reduces mortality in severe influenza cases, while remdesivir shows efficacy in SARS-CoV2 infection not requiring invasive ventilation.7 Severe SARS-CoV2 infection can be treated with immunomodulators. However, their availability is limited. Corticosteroids reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with SARS-CoV2; however, their use is associated with worse outcomes in influenza and RSV.7 8
Vaccination remains crucial for prevention of severe disease. RSV vaccination, in addition to influenza and SARS-CoV2 immunization, presents an opportunity to reduce morbidity and mortality.
References
1. Troeger C, et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18[11]:1191-1210.
2. WHO COVID-19 Epidemiological Update, 2024.
3. Coussement J, et al. Chest. 2022;161[6]:1475-1484.
4. Mulpuru S, et al. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2022;16[6]:1172-1182.
5. Saura O, et al. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2022;20[12]:1537-1550.
6. Inglis R, Ayebale E, Schultz MJ. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2019;25[1]:45-53.
7. O’Driscoll LS, Martin-Loeches I. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;42[6]:771-787.
8. Bhimraj, A et al. Clin Inf Dis. 2022.
Chest Infections and Disaster Response Network
Disaster Response and Global Health Section
Zein Kattih, MD
Kathryn Hughes, MD
Brian Tran, MD
Viral infections frequently cause acute respiratory failure requiring ICU admission. In the United States, influenza causes over 50,000 deaths annually and SARS-CoV2 resulted in 170,000 hospitalizations in December 2023 alone.1 2 RSV lacks precise incidence data due to inconsistent testing but is increasingly implicated in respiratory failure.
Patients with underlying pulmonary comorbidities are at increased risk of severe infection. RSV induces bronchospasm and increases the risk for severe infection in patients with obstructive lung disease.3 Additionally, COPD patients with viral respiratory infections have higher rates of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and death compared with similar patients admitted for other etiologies.4
Diagnosis typically is achieved with nasopharyngeal PCR swabs. Positive viral swabs correlate with higher ICU admission and ventilation rates in patients with COPD.4 Coinfection with multiple respiratory viruses leads to higher mortality rates and bacterial and fungal coinfection further increases morbidity and mortality.5
Treatment includes respiratory support with noninvasive ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula, reducing the need for mechanical ventilation.6 Inhaled bronchodilators are particularly beneficial in patients with RSV infection.5 Oseltamivir reduces mortality in severe influenza cases, while remdesivir shows efficacy in SARS-CoV2 infection not requiring invasive ventilation.7 Severe SARS-CoV2 infection can be treated with immunomodulators. However, their availability is limited. Corticosteroids reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with SARS-CoV2; however, their use is associated with worse outcomes in influenza and RSV.7 8
Vaccination remains crucial for prevention of severe disease. RSV vaccination, in addition to influenza and SARS-CoV2 immunization, presents an opportunity to reduce morbidity and mortality.
References
1. Troeger C, et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18[11]:1191-1210.
2. WHO COVID-19 Epidemiological Update, 2024.
3. Coussement J, et al. Chest. 2022;161[6]:1475-1484.
4. Mulpuru S, et al. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2022;16[6]:1172-1182.
5. Saura O, et al. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2022;20[12]:1537-1550.
6. Inglis R, Ayebale E, Schultz MJ. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2019;25[1]:45-53.
7. O’Driscoll LS, Martin-Loeches I. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;42[6]:771-787.