OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to validate dermatologic ultrasound as a complementary teledermatologic imaging modality in primary and tertiary care centers. METHODS: Six primary care centers and 1 tertiary care dermatology department collaborated in the program. Images were sent through the institutional teledermatologic platform to the tertiary care dermatology department. At the reference hospital, ultrasound images and clinical data were received and registered by a physician trained in dermatologic ultrasound. An in-person consultation was scheduled to confirm the teleultrasound diagnosis. The time of response by the tertiary center, quality and size of the teledermatologic image, and concordance with the in-person diagnosis were assessed for each dermatologic lesion. RESULTS: A total of 147 teleultrasound consultations with 143 patients (93 women and 50 men; mean age ± SD, 47 ± 23 years) were evaluated between June 2018 and January 2019. Nine teleultrasound consultations (6.1%) were not valid. Discordance between teleultrasound and the in-person diagnosis was evident in 6 of 138 cases (4.3%). Most cases corresponded to benign skin tumors (66.7%), followed by inflammatory skin lesions (15.9%), nonmelanoma skin lesions (13%), and other skin lesions (4.3%). All malignant tumors were detected (sensitivity, 100%), although 2 cases of benign lesions were telediagnosed as malignant (specificity, 97.8%). The positive and negative predictive values of a teleultrasound diagnosis of cutaneous malignancy were 90% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Asynchronous primary care teleultrasound combined with dermatologic ultrasound training at tertiary centers is an effective teledermatologic modality.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to validate dermatologic ultrasound as a complementary teledermatologic imaging modality in primary and tertiary care centers. METHODS: Six primary care centers and 1 tertiary care dermatology department collaborated in the program. Images were sent through the institutional teledermatologic platform to the tertiary care dermatology department. At the reference hospital, ultrasound images and clinical data were received and registered by a physician trained in dermatologic ultrasound. An in-person consultation was scheduled to confirm the teleultrasound diagnosis. The time of response by the tertiary center, quality and size of the teledermatologic image, and concordance with the in-person diagnosis were assessed for each dermatologic lesion. RESULTS: A total of 147 teleultrasound consultations with 143 patients (93 women and 50 men; mean age ± SD, 47 ± 23 years) were evaluated between June 2018 and January 2019. Nine teleultrasound consultations (6.1%) were not valid. Discordance between teleultrasound and the in-person diagnosis was evident in 6 of 138 cases (4.3%). Most cases corresponded to benign skin tumors (66.7%), followed by inflammatory skin lesions (15.9%), nonmelanoma skin lesions (13%), and other skin lesions (4.3%). All malignant tumors were detected (sensitivity, 100%), although 2 cases of benign lesions were telediagnosed as malignant (specificity, 97.8%). The positive and negative predictive values of a teleultrasound diagnosis of cutaneous malignancy were 90% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Asynchronous primary care teleultrasound combined with dermatologic ultrasound training at tertiary centers is an effective teledermatologic modality.