[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.197.171.35. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
January 1996

Instrumentation for Epiluminescence Microscopy: The Gap Between Research and Practice

Author Affiliations

100 S Ellsworth Ave Suite 707 San Mateo, CA 94401

Arch Dermatol. 1996;132(1):91-92. doi:10.1001/archderm.1996.03890250105022
Abstract

Many recent articles on epiluminescence microscopy (ELM) discuss the value of ELM in diagnosing pigmented lesions. Dermatologists have been urged to incorporate this technique in their daily practice. Most studies on the value of ELM have been performed by persons with special expertise. I am aware of only one article addressing the issue of training; it appeared in the March 1995 issue of the Archives, and is entitled "Epiluminescence Microscopy: A Useful Tool for the Diagnosis of Pigmented Skin Lesions for Formally Trained Dermatologists."1 In their article, Binder et al demonstrated a significant difference in the accuracy of ELM evaluations between practicing dermatologists and the group of expert researchers.

Has anyone addressed the significant differences between the instruments used by investigators and those available to the ordinary practitioner? Most studies on ELM have used binocular surface microscopes (operating microscopes) with excellent binocular optics. The instruments available to the dermatologists

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×