Efficacy of Systemic Dapsone Treatment for Pyoderma Gangrenosum: A Retrospective Review.

INTRODUCTION: Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a neutrophilic dermatosis commonly treated with steroid immunosuppression. The utility of dapsone as a non-immunosuppressive treatment for PG has been reported in case reports and series. We sought to evaluate the response and tolerability of concurrent systemic dapsone therapy for treating PG. METHODS: We reviewed PG patients treated with systemic dapsone at Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital from 2000-2015. A treatment episode was defined as a minimum of 4 weeks of dapsone therapy with a documented response of complete, partial, or no improvement in wound healing. RESULTS: 27 patients treated with systemic dapsone met inclusion criteria. 15.6% of treatment episodes demonstrated a response of complete healing, 81.3% of treatment episodes demonstrated a response of partial improvement, and 1 patient (3.1%) demonstrated no response. 9 patients (33.3%) had documented side effects of varying severity, with one (3.7%) requiring cessation of dapsone therapy. DISCUSSION: Systemic dapsone therapy may represent an effective and tolerable non-immunosuppressive adjuvant treatment for PG wound healing. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(10):1058-1060.

Two Cases of Severe Erosive Pustular Dermatosis Mimicking Infection.

INTRODUCTION: Erosive pustular dermatosis of the scalp (EPDS) is a noninfectious inflammatory disorder characterized by pustules, erosions, ulcerations, and crusted erythematous plaques that is often associated with mechanical or chemical trauma. While its appearance may mimic infection, its etiology is thought to have an autoimmune component based on responsiveness to immunomodulators. CASE REPORT: Herein, the authors present 2 cases of EPDS that were initially treated as primary infections. In both cases, the wounds did not respond to antimicrobial treatment and led to severe ulceration, exposing cranial bone. Both wounds improved with topical corticosteroid therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These cases represent the importance of considering topical steroid treatment and a diagnosis of EPDS after debridement for purulent scalp ulcers.

Opioid Prescribing Patterns and Complications in the Dermatology Medicare Population.

Importance: The ongoing opioid epidemic in the United States has been fueled by prescription opioids. Increases in opioid-related deaths and complications mandate clinicians in all fields to scrutinize their prescribing patterns. Objective: To characterize the current status and potential complications of opioid prescribing practices among dermatologists for Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional study used Medicare Part D prescriber data to evaluate opioid prescriptions by dermatologists from January 1 to December 31, 2014. The number of prescribers, opioid claims, beneficiaries, and days supplied as well as the type of opioid and geographic location of prescribers were extracted and analyzed. The top 1% of dermatologists prescribing opioids were identified and compared with a random sample of the same size among the remaining dermatologists based on sex, geographic location, type of practice, and time in practice. A systematic literature review was conducted to estimate the outcome of opioid prescribing practices on the exposed population. Main Outcome and Measures: Practice characteristics, epidemiologic factors, and consequences of opioids prescribed by dermatologists. Results: Of the 12 537 dermatologists in the study, 5305 (42.3%) prescribed no opioid claims, 5408 (43.1%) prescribed 1 to 10 opioid claims, and 1824 (14.5%) prescribed more than 10 opioid claims. Among dermatologists prescribing at least 10 opioid claims, a mean of 1.0 opioid claims was given to each beneficiary, with a supply lasting a mean of 4.4 days. A total of 108 dermatologists (93.9%) in the top 1% of opioid prescribers (n = 115) work in a surgical practice. Estimates suggest that opioids prescribed by dermatologists could annually lead to 3877 to 7602 beneficiaries continuing to use opioids at 1 year and 1825 to 4209 continuing to use opioids at 3 years. A total of 9882 to 22 806 beneficiaries could experience gastrointestinal tract or central nervous system adverse effects and 588 to 999 could experience fractures. Conclusions and Relevance: Opioid prescribing among dermatologists is limited and concentrated in the surgical setting, but it may be associated with a substantial number of adverse events that serve as a reminder to emphasize nonopioid pain medications in the postoperative setting.

Defensive Medicine in U.S. Spine Neurosurgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE: To compare defensive practices of U.S. spine and nonspine neurosurgeons in the context of state medical liability risk. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Defensive medicine is a commonly reported and costly phenomenon in neurosurgery. Although state liability risk is thought to contribute greatly to defensive practice, variation within neurosurgical specialties has not been well explored. METHODS: A validated, online survey was sent via email to 3344 members of the American Board of Neurological Surgeons. The instrument contained eight question domains: surgeon characteristics, patient characteristics, practice type, insurance type, surgeon liability profile, basic surgeon reimbursement, surgeon perceptions of medical legal environment, and the practice of defensive medicine. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 30.6% (n = 1026), including 499 neurosurgeons performing mainly spine procedures (48.6%). Spine neurosurgeons had a similar average practice duration as nonspine neurosurgeons (16.6 vs 16.9 years, P = 0.64) and comparable lifetime case volume (4767 vs 4,703, P = 0.71). The average annual malpractice premium for spine neurosurgeons was similar to nonspine neurosurgeons ($104,480.52 vs $101,721.76, P = 0.60). On average, spine neurosurgeons had a significantly higher rate of ordering labs, medications, referrals, procedures, and imaging solely for liability concerns compared with nonspine neurosurgeons (89.2% vs 84.6%, P = 0.031). Multivariate analysis revealed that spine neurosurgeons were roughly 3 times more likely to practice defensively compared with nonspine neurosurgeons (odds ratio, OR = 2.9, P = 0.001) when controlling for high-risk procedures (OR = 7.8, P < 0.001), annual malpractice premium (OR = 3.3, P = 0.01), percentage of patients publicly insured (OR = 1.1, P = 0.80), malpractice claims in the last 3 years (OR = 1.13, P = 0.71), and state medical-legal environment (OR = 1.3, P = 0.37). CONCLUSION: State-based medical legal environment is not a significant driver of increased defensive medicine associated with neurosurgical spine procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.