Alam, Murad

BackgroundAppropriate use criteria (AUC) provide physicians guidance in test selection, and can affect health care delivery, reimbursement policy and physician decision‐making.ObjectivesThe American Society of Dermatopathology, with input from the American Academy of Dermatology and the College of American Pathologists, sought to develop AUC in dermatopathology.MethodsThe RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology, which combines evidence‐based medicine, clinical experience and expert judgment, was used to develop AUC in dermatopathology.ResultsWith the number of ratings predetermined at 3, AUC were developed for 211 clinical scenarios involving 12 ancillary studies. Consensus was reached for 188 (89%) clinical scenarios, with 93 (44%) considered “usually appropriate,” 52 (25%) “rarely appropriate” and 43 (20%) “uncertain appropriateness.”LimitationsThe methodology requires a focus on appropriateness without comparison between tests and irrespective of cost.ConclusionsThe ultimate decision of when to order specific test rests with the physician and is one where the expected benefit exceeds the negative consequences. This publication outlines the recommendations of appropriateness—AUC for 12 tests used in dermatopathology. Importantly, these recommendations may change considering new evidence. Results deemed “uncertain appropriateness” and where consensus was not reached may benefit from further research.

BACKGROUND Intracutaneous lidocaine is used for anesthesia in dermatologic surgery for skin cancer excision and repair with exceedingly low incidence of reported adverse events. OBJECTIVE To measure (1) the quantity of lidocaine typically used for facial skin cancer excision and reconstruction; and (2) the frequency and character of associated adverse events. METHODS Survey study of dermatologic surgeons with longitudinal reporting. Reported practice during 10 business days: (1) mean volume of 1% lidocaine per skin cancer excision; (2) maximum per excision; (3) mean per reconstruction; and (4) maximum per reconstruction. RESULTS A total of 437 of 1,175 subjects contacted (37.2%) responded. Mean per excision was 3.44 mL (SD: 2.97), and reconstruction 11.70 mL (10.14). Maximum per excision was 6.54 mL (4.23), and reconstruction was 15.85 mL (10.39). No cases of lidocaine toxicity were reported, diagnosed, or treated. Incidence of adverse events possibly anesthesia related was >0.15%, with most (0.13%) being mild cases of dizziness, drowsiness, or lightheadedness from epinephrine tachycardia. CONCLUSION Toxicity associated with local anesthesia other than lidocaine was not studied. Volumes of lidocaine in skin cancer excision and repair are modest and within safe limits. Lidocaine toxicity is exceedingly rare to entirely absent. For comparable indications, lidocaine is safer than conscious sedation or general anesthesia.