Cutaneous reactions after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination: a cross-sectional Spanish nationwide study of 405 cases.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous reactions after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are poorly characterized. OBJECTIVE: To describe and classify cutaneous reactions after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. METHODS: A nationwide Spanish cross-sectional study was conducted. We included patients with cutaneous reactions within 21 days of any dose of the approved vaccines at the time of the study. After a face-to-face visit with a dermatologist, information on cutaneous reactions was collected via an online professional survey and clinical photographs were sent by email. Investigators searched for consensus on clinical patterns and classification. RESULTS: From 16 February to 15 May 2021, we collected 405 reactions after vaccination with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech; 40·2%), mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 36·3%) and AZD1222 (AstraZeneca; 23·5%) vaccines. Mean patient age was 50·7 years and 80·2% were female. Cutaneous reactions were classified as injection site ('COVID arm', 32·1%), urticaria (14·6%), morbilliform (8·9%), papulovesicular (6·4%), pityriasis rosea-like (4·9%) and purpuric (4%) reactions. Varicella zoster and herpes simplex virus reactivations accounted for 13·8% of reactions. The COVID arm was almost exclusive to women (95·4%). The most reported reactions in each vaccine group were COVID arm (mRNA-1273, Moderna, 61·9%), varicella zoster virus reactivation (BNT162b2, Pfizer-BioNTech, 17·2%) and urticaria (AZD1222, AstraZeneca, 21·1%). Most reactions to the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine were described in women (90·5%). Eighty reactions (21%) were classified as severe/very severe and 81% required treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Cutaneous reactions after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are heterogeneous. Most are mild-to-moderate and self-limiting, although severe/very severe reactions are reported. Knowledge of these reactions during mass vaccination may help healthcare professionals and reassure patients.

Teledermatology-driven topical therapy of actinic keratosis: a comparative study of clinical effectiveness and compliance.

BACKGROUND: Teledermatology (TD) provides efficient care for skin cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of imiquimod 5% for the treatment of AK with in-person care and through TD. METHODS: Longitudinal prospective controlled study including patients with single AK diagnosed and treated at face-to-face visits (FTF group) or through teledermatology (TD group) with imiquimod 5% cream. The main outcome measures assessed were the complete and global response percentage (CR and GR) under per-protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. RESULTS: A total of 157 patients were enrolled (FTF = 75, TD = 82). PP analysis showed CR in 66.7% of FTF patients and 65.6% in TD patients (P > 0.05). The ITT yielded CR in 64.0% and 51.2% in FTF visits and TD, respectively (P = 0.073). The analysis showed an advantage of FTF care against TD in achieving GR (84.0% vs. 70.7%; P = 0.036). Facial location and local adverse reactions were the only explanatory factors of complete response in the ITT approach. Treatment completion was found in 90.7% and 72.0% in the FTF and TD groups, respectively (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in patient counselling at the primary care centre are needed before the implementation of TD as a routine methodology for the management of AK.

Reconstruction Techniques of Choice for the Facial Cosmetic Units. / Técnicas reconstructivas de elección por unidades estéticas faciales.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A broad range of skin flaps can be used to repair facial surgical defects after the excision of a tumor. The aim of our study was to develop a practical guideline covering the most useful skin grafts for each of the distinct facial cosmetic units. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a multicenter study in which 10 dermatologists with extensive experience in reconstructive surgery chose their preferred technique for each cosmetic unit. The choice of flaps was based on personal experience, taking into account factors such as suitability of the reconstruction technique for the specific defect, the final cosmetic result, surgical difficulty, and risk of complications. Each dermatologist proposed 2 flaps in order of preference for each cosmetic subunit. A score of 10 was given to the first flap and a score of 5 to the second. RESULTS: The total score obtained for each of the options proposed by the participating dermatologists was used to draw up a list of the 3 best grafts for each site. There was notable unanimity of criteria among most of the dermatologists for reconstructive techniques such as the glabellar flap for defects of the medial canthus of the eye, the bilateral advancement flag flap or H flap for the forehead, the rotary door flap for the auricle of the ear, the Mustarde flap for the infraorbital cheek, the O-Z rotation flap for the scalp, the Tenzel flap for the lower eyelid, and the island flap for the upper lip. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study will be useful as a practical guide to choosing the best reconstruction technique for each of the facial cosmetic units.