ArticleActa dermato-venereologica2020
Sutton Naevi as Melanoma Simulators: Can Confocal Microscopy Help in the Diagnosis?
Article in Acta dermato-venereologica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Challenges in Deciphering Sutton Nevi-Literature Review and Personal Experience.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Cutaneous Events Associated with Immunotherapy of Melanoma: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Langerhans Cells as Morphologic Mimickers of Atypical Melanocytes on Reflectance Confocal Microscopy: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2021Review
- Halo Nevi Are Not Trivial: About 2 Young Patients of Regressed Primary Melanoma That Simulates Halo Nevi.Case reports in dermatological medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sutton naevi can sometimes present a challenging appearance with atypical presentation, also by dermoscopy. Reflectance confocal microscopy could help in making a diagnosis. This study prospectively collected two groups of Sutton nevi: the first one was composed by typical white halo naevi monitored for one year (13, 23%) and the second one was made up of atypical lesions excised in order to rule out melanoma, which were histologically diagnosed as Sutton naevi (21, 37%). These two groups of Sutton naevi were compared to a retrospectively collected cohort of thin melanomas with histologic regression features (23, 40%). On dermoscopy, atypical Sutton naevi and melanomas were indistinguishable. Reflectance confocal microscopy demonstrated significant differences at the dermo-epidermal junction: marked dermo-epidermal junction thickening and non-edged papilla were associated with melanoma, while the presence of nests was associated with Sutton naevi. However, reflectance confocal microscopy also detected marked intraepidermal pagetoid cells in Sutton naevi that were a combination of MelanA+ and CD1a+ cells. Sutton naevi can simulate melanoma, under both dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy. Nevertheless, relevant confocal dermo-epidermal junction features and the clinical scenario can be helpful to make a final diagnosis, especially in those situations where melanoma must be ruled out.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.