Pigmented lesions of the genital mucosa are common, affecting between 10% and 20% of the population. The clinical appearance is sometimes confusing. They are often extensive, irregular, and inhomogeneous in color, which can make them look suspicious. Moreover, dermatoscopic imaging is often complex to interpret, as shown by the many different patterns reported in the literature. Thus, preliminary work in confocal microscopy has shown that it is possible to simplify diagnosis by using microscopic, in vivo, non-invasive imaging. However, CIM cameras are rare, very expensive and difficult to access. Conversely, digital dermatoscopes with 400x magnification are much less expensive and can also allow, in a certain number of cases, an examination at the cellular level of tumors, with, in our opinion, the advantage of being easy to learn. In the context of the pooling of resources within medical centers in particular, their dissemination should accelerate. Furthermore, x400 dermatoscopy can provide similar information to IVCM for the most frequent black genital tumors.
The hypothesis that motivates this work is that X400 dermatoscopy in the hands of non-experts would allow a fast increase in their diagnostic capacity by identifying the main genital pigmented tumor, namely melanosis, and thus improve the use of expert centers relieved of the care of benign tumors.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
157
Analysis of photos of pigmented tumours by the three groups with different techniques for each group to compare them.
CHU Saint Etienne
Saint-Etienne, France
Comparison results between expert dermatologists with x20 dermatoscopic photos (Group A) and non-dermatologists physicians with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group B)
Performance of x400 dermatoscopic (results of expert dermatologists versus non-dermatologists physicians)
Time frame: Year: 1
Comparison results between expert dermatologists with x20 dermatoscopic photos (Group A) and gynecologists with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group B1)
Performance of x400 dermatoscopic (results of expert dermatologists versus gynecologists)
Time frame: Year: 1
Comparison results between expert dermatologists with x20 dermatoscopic photos (Group A) and general practitioners with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group B2)
Performance of x400 dermatoscopic (results of expert dermatologists versus general practitioners)
Time frame: Year: 1
Comparison results between gynecologists with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group B1) and general practitioners with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group B2).
Performance of x400 dermatoscopic (results of gynecologists versus general practitioners)
Time frame: Year: 1
Comparison results between expert dermatologists with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group A) and skin Artificial intelligence software with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group C).
Performance of x400 dermatoscopic (results of expert dermatologists versus skin Artificial intelligence software)
Time frame: Year: 1
Comparison results between dermatologists physicians with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group B) and skin Artificial intelligence software with x400 dermatoscopic photos (Group C).
Performance of x400 dermatoscopic (results of dermatologists physicians versus skin Artificial intelligence software)
Time frame: Year: 1
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.