Use of 5-0 Fast Absorbing Gut versus 6-0 Fast Absorbing Gut during cutaneous wound closure on the head and neck: A randomized evaluator-blinded split-wound comparative effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Absorbable suture material (Fast Absorbing Gut [FG], Ethicon, Somerville NJ) is often used for patient convenience; however, the optimal diameter of FG sutures is debatable. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of 6-0 FG during repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds on the head and neck improves scar cosmesis compared with the use of 5-0 FG. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, split-scar intervention in patients undergoing repair of linear cutaneous wounds on the head and neck. The scar was assessed 3 months after surgery via the Physician Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), a validated instrument. RESULTS: The difference in the sum of the POSAS component scores for 6-0 FG (12.03) compared with that for 5-0 FG (13.11) was not statistically significant (P = .26). Observer overall opinion was similar for both interventions, at 2.49 for 6-0 FG vs 2.64 for 5-0 FG (P = .54). The difference in the number of complications in the 5-0 FG group (15) vs the 6-0 FG group (10) was not statistically significant (P = .40). LIMITATIONS: Single-center study with wounds limited to the head and neck in white individuals, with a predominance of men. CONCLUSION: For linear repair of cutaneous wounds, 6-0 FG was not statistically different for cosmetic outcomes, scar width, and complications compared with 5-0 FG.

Self-reported Patient Motivations for Seeking Cosmetic Procedures.

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

Lasers and Energy-Based Devices in Men.

BACKGROUND: The demand for cosmetic treatments with lasers and energy-based devices has increased among men, but there is a dearth of literature that addresses the approach and treatment of cosmetic male patients. OBJECTIVE: To summarize common cosmetic concerns for which male patients seek cosmetic treatments and to provide sex-specific recommendations for the lasers and energy-based devices that can be used for treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors conducted a literature search using the PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases using the search terms male, men, gender, and cosmetic dermatology. RESULTS: The authors review sex-specific treatment recommendations regarding the use of lasers and energy-based devices for the conditions for which men most commonly seek cosmetic treatment, which include photo-/actinic damage, acne scarring, rhinophyma, hair removal, axillary hyperhidrosis, and loose neck/submental skin. Cosmetic issues the authors will touch on, but whose approaches or considerations vary less in men compared with women, are hyperpigmentation, vascular lesions, and facial rejuvenation. CONCLUSION: Sex-specific treatment approaches with lasers and energy-based devices should be used to best serve male cosmetic patients.

A Hyperpigmented Reticular Rash in a Patient on Peritoneal Dialysis.

Chronically ill patients often develop uncommon exam findings. A 16-year-old female with end-stage renal disease secondary to immune complex-mediated glomerulonephritis on peritoneal dialysis (PD) developed a pruritic, hyperpigmented reticular rash on her abdomen, sparing the PD catheter insertion site. The rash appeared approximately 6 weeks after initiating PD. She used a heating pad nightly during PD for dialysis drain pain. Testing for systemic and autoimmune disease was negative. She was referred to dermatology, where the diagnosis of erythema ab igne (EAI), a well-described but less well-known hyperpigmented reticular cutaneous eruption caused by chronic exposure to low levels of infrared heat, was confirmed. The eruption is typically painless but is often pruritic. Common sources of heat include fires, stoves, portable heaters, heating pads, and laptop computers. The association between EAI and PD is unknown. Our patient discontinued the heating pad and her rash resolved.