ArticleThe Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology2025
Ultraviolet-Induced Fluorescence Dermoscopy: Game Changers.
Article in The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultraviolet-induced fluorescence dermoscopy (UVFD) is a novel diagnostic and visualization technique that enhances visualization of skin dermatoses with ultraviolet (UV) light. UVFD has been used to diagnose dermatoses including bacterial and fungal infections, pigmentary disorders, and skin neoplasms. We present five cases-pitted keratolysis, porokeratosis, molluscum, biopsy site identification, and lentigo maligna-where UVFD alone, compared to traditional polarized dermoscopy (PD) or the unaided clinical exam, served as a "game-changer" in diagnosis and management. Polarized and UV images were captured using a DL5 dermatoscope coupled to a smartphone. In the cases of pitted keratolysis, porokeratosis, and molluscum, we highlight distinct patterns of fluorescence that were readily visualized with UVFD and aided efficient diagnosis, in contrast with more subtle features that were seen under PD. We also demonstrate the utility of UVFD in identification and confirmation of a prior biopsy site in a patient who presented for excision of a skin cancer. Finally, we describe the advantage of UVFD in presurgical margin delineation in a patient with lentigo maligna. In these cases, we show that UVFD facilitates prompt and accurate diagnosis, streamlines appropriate treatment, and has the capacity to reduce the need for unnecessary biopsies. Given the convenience and practicality of a dermatoscope equipped with a UV light, we propose that clinicians would benefit from the use of UVFD as a supplementary tool alongside conventional dermoscopy, rather than as a substitute.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40843240PMC12367246What 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.