Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimierung der dermatopathologischen Diagnostik durch digitale Fotografie und Internet

Bedeutung der klinisch-pathologischen Korrelation

Optimizing dermatopathologic diagnosis with digital photography and internet

The significance of clinicopathologic correlation

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Hautarzt Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die klinisch-pathologische Korrelation ist das Fundament, auf dem jede korrekte Diagnose ruht. Insbesondere in der Dermatopathologie wird die Präzision der feingeweblichen Beurteilung durch genaue Kenntnis des dermatologischen Status maßgeblich gesteigert. Digitale Fotografie, Internet und kostengünstige Datenträger machen es möglich, zwischen behandelnden Dermatologen und assoziierten Dermatopathologen einen kostenneutralen und zeitsparenden Bildtransfer für eine optimale klinisch-pathologische Korrelation aufrechtzuerhalten.

Abstract

Clinicopathologic correlation is the basis of a precise diagnosis. Especially in dermatopathology, the precision of a microscopic diagnosis may significantly be increased by thorough knowledge of the clinical picture. The advent of digital photography, the internet and moderately priced CDs and USB-sticks have made it possible to establish and maintain a time-saving, low-cost picture data transfer between dermatologist and dermatopathologist which is optimally suited for clinicopathologic correlation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6
Abb. 7

Literatur

  1. Argenziano G, Soyer HP (2001) Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions – a valuable tool for early diagnosis of melanoma. Lancet Oncol 2: 443–449

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bauer J, Leinweber B, Metzler G et al. (2006) Correlation with digital dermoscopic images can help dermatopathologists to diagnose equivocal skin tumors. Br J Dermatol 155: 546–551

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bauer J, Metzler G, Rassner G et al. (2001) Dermatoscopy turns histopathologist’s attention to the suspicious area in melanocytic lesions. Arch Dermatol 137: 1338–1340

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brownstein MH, Rabinowitz AD (1983) The invisible dermatoses. J Am Acad Dermatol 8: 579–588

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ebner C, Gabler G, Massone C et al. (2006) Mobile teledermatology coming of age. Elektrotechnik Informationstechnik 123: 148–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Eich D, Scharffetter-Kochanek K, Weihrauch J et al. (2004) Calcinosis of the cutis and subcutis: an unusual nonimmunologic adverse reaction to subcutaneous injections of low-molecular-weight calcium-containing heparins. J Am Acad Dermatol 50: 210–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Eminovic N, Keizer NF de, Bindels PJE et al. (2006) Maturity of teledermatology evaluation research: a systematic literature review. Br J Dermatol 156: 412–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Finch TL, Mair FS, May CR (2007) Teledermatology in the U.K.: lessons in service innovation. Br J Dermatol 156: 521–527

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fox JG, Walli RK, Jaffray B et al. (1994) Calcified subcutaneous nodules due to calcium heparin injections in a patient with chronic renal failure. Nephrol Dial Transplant 9: 187–188

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Goldberg DJ (2004) Digital photography, confidentiality, and teledermatology. Arch Dermatol 140: 477–478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jürgens U: Datenschutzrechtliche und sicherheitstechnische Anforderungen an IT-Systeme im medizinischen Bereich. http://www.datenschutzzentrum.de/material/themen/gesund/dsichmed.htm

  12. Kempf W, Reichlin S, Burg G (2003) HistoClinC: a web-based telemedicine application for clinicopathologic correlations in dermatopathology. Curr Probl Dermatol 32: 213–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Krüger-Brand HE (1999) Regeln für die sichere digitale Kommunikation. Dtsch Arztebl 96: A-2349–A-2352

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lozzi GP, Soyer HP, Massone C et al. (2007) The additive value of second opinion teleconsulting in the management of patients with challenging inflammatory, neoplastic skin diseases: a best practice model in dermatology? J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 21: 30–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Massone C, Lozzi GP, Wurm E et al. (2007) Cellular phones in clinical teledermatology. Arch Dermatol 141: 1319–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Massone C, Soyer HP, Hofmann-Wellenhof R et al. (2006) Two years‘ experience with Web-based teleconsulting in dermatology. J Telemed Telecare 12: 83–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Menzies SW (2006) Why perform dermoscopy? The evidence for its role in the routine management of pigmented skin lesions. Arch Dermatol 142: 1211–1212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Piccolo D, Smolle J, Wolf IH et al. (1999) Face-to-face diagnosis vs telediagnosis of pigmented skin tumors: a teledermoscopic study. Arch Dermatol 135: 1467–1471

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Piccolo D, Smolle J, Argenziano G et al. (2000) Teledermoscopy – results of a multicenter study on 43 pigmented skin lesions. J Telemed Telecare 6: 132–137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Requena L, Kutzner H (2002) Die unsichtbaren Dermatosen. Pathologe 23: 54–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Soyer HP, Hofmann-Wellenhof R, Massone C et al. (2005) telederm.org: freely available online consultations in dermatology. PLoS Medicine (http://www.plosmedicine.org) 2: 0293–0295

  22. Zalaudek I, Ferrara G, Argenziano G, Kerl H (2007) Drei wichtige dermatoskopische Regeln. JDDG 5: 422–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dermatopathologische Gemeinschaftspraxis, Siemensstraße 6/1, 88048, Friedrichshafen, Deutschland

    H. Kutzner & L. Schärer

  2. Kempf und Pfaltz, Histologische Diagnostik, Zürich, Schweiz

    W. Kempf

  3. Fundacion Jimenez Diaz, Madrid, Spanien

    L. Requena

Authors
  1. H. Kutzner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. W. Kempf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. Schärer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. L. Requena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Kutzner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kutzner, H., Kempf, W., Schärer, L. et al. Optimierung der dermatopathologischen Diagnostik durch digitale Fotografie und Internet. Hautarzt 58, 760–768 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00105-007-1382-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00105-007-1382-1

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation