Search

Since the first COVID-19 lockdown in India was declared, all scientific conferences and related activities have been conducted in online formats (1). The ACS(I) [Association of Cutaneous Surgeons (India)] conducted its Annual National Conference called ACSICON-2021 for over 1150 delegates in mid-2021 in a hybrid mode. ACS(I) was one of the first organizations to embrace the hybrid conferencing strategy in the post-COVID-19 era in India. However, while meeting feedback and testimonials are typically gathered, there is very little public data documenting conference attendees' viewpoints. The goal of this research study was to look at the viewpoints of medical conference attendees (such as physicians and medical professionals) on hybrid conferencing as a future trend, the danger of infectivity and transmissibility of COVID-19 during and after the event, the effectiveness of stringent safety protocols and vaccination in preventing the disease and thereby assess the feasibility of hybrid conference as the most convenient mode of learning interaction in the current COVID-19 era and also Post COVID-19 era., Materials and Methods: The physical attendees were surveyed post-ACSICON 2021 conference online, using a mixed-methods technique. Attendees were given a 16-point questionnaire using Google Forms that covered subjects including the COVID-19 preventive procedure, immunization status, infection rates during and after the conference, and overall satisfaction with the hybrid conference. A total of 231 people were sent the survey questionnaire., Results: Only 0.4% ( n = 1) of the participants reported being infected by COVID-19 virus after the conference. 86% ( n = 198) of the respondents also felt that all the necessary precautions were taken during the ACSICON 2021conference. Most of the respondents (82%, n = 189) rated the hybrid conference interaction to be more satisfying than an online conference. An overwhelming majority of the respondents (92%, n = 209) found hybrid conferences to be a safer option than regular conference., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic's scope has forced a paradigm change in medical practice and research (1). ACSICON 2021 is an example of how, with careful organization, strict implementation of meticulous preventive procedures, and strict adherence to the COVID-19 protocol, medical conferences may be held without danger of infection and its transmission. Given the pace with which vaccinations are being administered, a new reality in which technology and live networking intersect via hybrid conferences will result in a more engaging and adaptable medical conference experience. In the long run, this can bring about a significant shift in the conduct of scientific meetings to best suit delegates' needs and conveniences., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2022 Journal of Cutaneous and Aesthetic Surgery.)

Background: Amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, dermatologists must be prepared to restructure their practice of procedural dermatology and cutaneous aesthetic surgeries. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented several challenges and has ushered in several changes in practice such as teledermatology, with many physicians adopting virtual consultations and treatments. Performing procedures in the times of COVID-19 pandemic presents challenges such as risk of transmission to doctors and staff due to potential aerosolization, release of virus droplets during the procedures, and risk of virus transfer through the instruments both in the peri- and postoperative period. This can have several medical, administrative, and legal implications., Objectives: This document aimed to outline best practices that can be followed in this scenario to perform cutaneous surgeries and procedures to ensure safer skin surgery., Recommendations: Standard precautions include social distancing of at least 1 m, hand hygiene, appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE), safe injection practices, sterilization and disinfection of medical devices, environmental cleaning, and respiratory hygiene. It is generally advisable to see patients only by appointments. Each clinic should have a special area at entry for screening patients and providing sanitizers and masks. Procedures, which are of short duration, performed on nonfacial areas are considered as low risk and require donning surgical mask. Procedures involved with minimal invasiveness and bleeding, short duration procedures on the face such as injectables, chemical peels, and aerosol-generating procedures on nonfacial areas are considered moderate risk. These procedures need apron with head cover, N95 mask, face shield, double gloves, and smoke evacuator with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) or ultralow particulate air (ULPA) filter. Aerosol and plume-regenerating procedures (such as ablative lasers on the face), prolonged surgeries on head (such as hair transplantation), intraoral, and intranasal procedures are considered high risk. These procedures must be carried out with full body cover with surgical gown, head cover, N95 mask, face shield, double gloves, and smoke evacuator. Physicians should be aware of local epidemiological situation and adhere to the relevant guidelines issued by the relevant governmental agencies., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Cutaneous and Aesthetic Surgery.)

Background: Currently, the standard protocol regarding the performance of procedures on patients receiving or having recently received isotretinoin (13- cis -retinoic acid) states that the procedures should not be performed. The recommendations in standard books and drug insert require discontinuation of isotretinoin for 6 months before performing cosmetic procedures, including waxing, dermabrasion, chemical peels, laser procedures, or incisional and excisional cold-steel surgery. These recommendations have been followed for over two decades despite little evidence for the stated increased risk of scarring., Objective: The Association of Cutaneous Surgeons (I) constituted a task force to review the evidence and to recommend consensus guidelines regarding the safety of skin procedures, including resurfacing, energy-device treatments, and dermatosurgical procedures in patients with concurrent or recent isotretinoin administration., Materials and Methods: Data were extracted from the literature through a PubMed search using the keywords "isotretinoin," "safety," "scarring," "keloids," "hypertrophic scarring," and "pigmentation." The evidence was then labeled and circulated to all members of task force for review., Results: The task force is of the opinion that there is insufficient evidence to support the current protocol of avoiding and delaying treatments in the patient group under consideration and recommends that the current practice should be discontinued. The task force concludes that performing procedures such as laser hair removal, fractional lasers for aging and acne scarring, lasers for pigmented skin lesions, fractional radio-frequency microneedling, superficial and medium-depth peels, microdermabrasion, dermaroller, biopsies, radio-frequency ablation, and superficial excisions is safe in patients with concurrent or recent isotretinoin administration., Competing Interests: The authors have indicated no significant interest with commercial supporters.

Background: The current standard recommendation is to avoid surgical interventions in patients taking oral isotretinoin. However, this recommendation has been questioned in several recent publications., Aim: To document the safety of cosmetic and surgical interventions, among patients receiving or recently received oral isotretinoin., Materials and Methods: Association of Cutaneous Surgeons, India, in May 2012, initiated this study, at 11 centers in different parts of India. The data of 183 cases were collected monthly, from June 2012 to May 2013. Of these 61 patients had stopped oral isotretinoin before surgery and 122 were concomitantly taking oral isotretinoin during the study period. In these 183 patients, a total of 504 interventions were performed. These included[1] 246 sessions of chemical peels such as glycolic acid, salicylic acid, trichloroacetic acid, and combination peels;[2] 158 sessions of lasers such as ablative fractional laser resurfacing with erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet and CO2, conventional full face CO2 laser resurfacing, laser-assisted hair reduction with long-pulsed neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet, diode laser, and LASIK surgery;[3] 27 sessions of cold steel surgeries such as microneedling, skin biopsy, subcision, punch elevation of scars, excision of skin lesion, and wisdom tooth extraction;[4] 1 session of electrosurgery., Results: No significant side effects were noted in most patients. 2 cases of keloid were documented which amounted to 0.4% of side effects in 504 interventions, with a significant P value of 0.000. Reversible transient side effects were erythema in 10 interventions and hyperpigmentation in 15., Conclusion: The study showed that performing dermatosurgical and laser procedures in patients receiving or recently received isotretinoin is safe, and the current guidelines of avoiding dermatosurgical and laser interventions in such patients taking isotretinoin need to be revised.

Background: Ensuring stability of the disease process is essential for undertaking surgical intervention in vitiligo. However, there is no consensus regarding the minimum duration of stability or the relative importance of disease and lesional stability in selecting patients for vitiligo grafting., Aim: This multicentric study aims to assess the relative importance of lesional and disease stability on selecting patients for vitiligo grafting., Materials and Methods: One hundred seventy patients were recruited into the study and divided into two groups: Group A with lesional stability of >1 year but overall disease stability of only 6-11 months and Group B with overall disease stability of >1 year. Patients underwent either tissue or cellular vitiligo grafting on the selected lesions and the repigmentation achieved was scored from 0 (no repigmentation) to 6 (100% repigmentation). Repigmentation achieved on different sites of the body was compared between the two groups. Adverse effects at both the donor and the recipient sites were also compared., Results: Of the 170 patients who were enrolled, 82 patients were placed in Group A and 88 patients in Group B. Average repigmentation achieved (on scale of 0 to 6) was 3.8 and 4.04 in Group A and Group B, respectively. In Group A, ≥90% repigmentation was achieved in 36.6% (30/82) patients, while 37.5% (33/88) achieved similar results in Group B. Additionally, 47.6% (39/82) and 53.4% (47/88) of cases achieved partial repigmentation in Group A and Group B, respectively. Perigraft halo was the commonest adverse effect observed in both groups. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups with respect to the repigmentation achieved or adverse effects observed. Repigmentation achieved was the best on the face and neck area, while acral areas responded the least., Conclusions: Lesional stability seems to be as relevant as the overall disease stability in selecting patients for surgical intervention in vitiligo.

Q-switched (QS) lasers are widely considered the gold standard for tattoo removal, with excellent clinical results, impressive predictability, and a good safety profile. The generation of giant pulses by the method of Q-switching is responsible for the unique laser-tissue interaction that is seen in tattoo removal by QS lasers. The QS lasers work by impaction and dissolution of the tattoo pigments. Mechanical fragmentation of the tattoo pigments encased in intracellular lamellated organelles followed by their phagocytosis by macrophages is thought to be the major event in the clearance of pigments by QS lasers. A few novel techniques have been tried in recent times to hasten the clearance of tattoo pigments.