Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysisan Australian analysis of treatment outcomes and mortalityArticle no: IJDT_A_1568380 Enclosures: 1) Query sheet 2) Article proofs 4. Funding: Was your research for this article funded by a funding agency? If so, please insert `This work was supported by ', followed by the grant number in square brackets `[grant number xxxx]'. 5. Supplemental data and underlying research materials: Do you wish to include the location of the underlying research materials (e.g. data, samples or models) for your article? If so, please insert this sentence before the reference section: `The underlying research materials for this article can be accessed at / description of location [author to complete]'. If your article includes supplemental data, the link will also be provided in this paragraph. See for further explanation of supplemental data and underlying research materials.6. The PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) and CrossRef databases (www.crossref.org/) have been used to validate the references. Changes resulting from mismatches are tracked in red font. AUTHOR QUERIESQ1:Please check the affiliations are correct as set.How to make corrections to your proofs using Adobe Acrobat/ReaderTaylor & Francis offers you a choice of options to help you make corrections to your proofs. Your PDF proof file has been enabled so that you can mark up the proof directly using Adobe Acrobat/Reader. This is the simplest and best way for you to ensure that your corrections will be incorporated. If you wish to do this, please follow these instructions:1. Save the file to your hard disk.2. Check which version of Adobe Acrobat/Reader you have on your computer. You can do this by clicking on the "Help" tab, and then "About".If Adobe Reader is not installed, you can get the latest version free from http://get.adobe.com/reader/.3. If you have Adobe Acrobat/Reader 10 or a later version, click on the "Comment" link at the right-hand side to view the Comments pane.4. You can then select any text and mark it up for deletion or replacement, or insert new text as needed. Please note that these will clearly be displayed in the Comments pane and secondary annotation is not needed to draw attention to your corrections. If you need to include new sections of text, it is also possible to add a comment to the proofs. To do this, use the Sticky Note tool in the task bar. Please also see our FAQs here: http://journalauthors.tandf.co.uk/production/index.asp.5. Make sure that you save the file when you close the document before uploading it to CATS using the "Upload File" button on the online correction form. If you have more than one file, please zip them together and then upload the zip file.If you prefer, you can make your corrections using the CATS online correction form.

This paper identifies clinical factors that could be used to assess risk of surgical site infection following Mohs. Support is provided for some elements of existing guidelines: the type of repair appears to influence risk. 1 We found no support for differing locations on the head and neck being at increased risk or that flaps on the nose were more at risk than flaps elsewhere. We propose that this could be explained if the microbiome accounts for most of the risk for surgical site infection and is uniform in terms of the presence of S. aureus for an individual on the head and neck. Further detailed anatomical work on the head and neck microbiome would be needed to support this. 2 We did not have enough data to comment specifically on the risk from wedge closure or locations such as the groin and lower leg as risk factors. The surgical site infection risk synergy demonstrated between nasal S. aureus carriage and graft repair seems likely to result from occlusion of the skin which has been demonstrated to increase bacteria after 48 h. 3 Strategies for reducing this particular risk would include preoperative topical decolonisation of nasal S. aureus 4,5 and reducing the time period for which occlusive dressings are applied following grafting. An additional approach, applicable for all patients, would include enhanced clinical surveillance post-operatively for those who by the data from this analysis appear to be at increased risk of surgical site infection.

Although lentigines are usually benign, they can be associated with a number of genetic syndromes in which neoplasms and other multi‐system pathological processes occur. Here, we report the case of a 6‐year‐old girl who presented with atypical lentiginosis and hyperpigmentation caused by a de novo genetic variant in the KIT gene.

No abstract