Background. The use of teledermatology has spread over the last years, especially during the recent SARS-Cov-2 pandemic. Teledermoscopy, an extension of teledermatology, consists of consulting dermoscopic images, also transmitted through smartphones, to remotely diagnose skin tumors or other dermatological diseases. The purpose of this work was to verify the diagnostic validity of images acquired with an inexpensive smartphone microscope (NurugoTM), employing convolutional neural networks (CNN) to classify malignant melanoma (MM), melanocytic nevus (MN), and seborrheic keratosis (SK). Methods. The CNN, trained with 600 dermatoscopic images from the ISIC (International Skin Imaging Collaboration) archive, was tested on three test sets: ISIC images, images acquired with the NurugoTM, and images acquired with a conventional dermatoscope. Results. The results obtained, although with some limitations due to the smartphone device and small data set, were encouraging, showing comparable results to the clinical dermatoscope and up to 80% accuracy (out of 10 images, two were misclassified) using the NurugoTM demonstrating how an amateur device can be used with reasonable levels of diagnostic accuracy. Conclusion. Considering the low cost and the ease of use, the NurugoTM device could be a useful tool for general practitioners (GPs) to perform the first triage of skin lesions, aiding the selection of lesions that require a face-to-face consultation with dermatologists.

No abstract

Background: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, teledermoscopy has been increasingly used in the remote diagnosis of skin cancers. In a study conducted in 2020, we demonstrated a potential role of an inexpensive device (NurugoTM Derma) as a first triage to select the skin lesions that require a face-to-face consultation with dermatologists. Herein, we report the results of a novel study that aimed to better investigate the performance of NurugoTM. Objectives: (i) verify whether the NurugoTM can be a communication tool between the general practitioner (GP) and dermatologist in the first assessment of skin lesions, (ii) analyze the degree of diagnostic–therapeutic agreement between dermatologists, (iii) estimate the number of potentially serious diagnostic errors. Methods: One hundred and forty-four images of skin lesions were collected at the Dermatology Outpatient Clinic in Novara using a conventional dermatoscope (instrument F), the NurugoTM (instrument N), and the latter with the interposition of a laboratory slide (instrument V). The images were evaluated in-blind by four dermatologists, and each was asked to make a diagnosis and to specify a possible treatment. Results: Our data show that F gave higher agreement values for all dermatologists, concerning the real clinical diagnosis. Nevertheless, a medium/moderate agreement value was obtained also for N and V instruments and that can be considered encouraging and indicate that all examined tools can potentially be used for the first screening of skin lesions. The total amount of misclassified lesions was limited (especially with the V tool), with up to nine malignant lesions wrongly classified as benign. Conclusions: NurugoTM, with adequate training, can be used to build a specific support network between GP and dermatologist or between dermatologists. Furthermore, its use could be extended to the diagnosis and follow-up of other skin diseases, especially for frail patients in emergencies, such as the current pandemic context.

Background Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, teledermoscopy has been increasingly used in the remote diagnosis of skin cancers. In a study conducted in 2020, we demonstrated a potential role of an inexpensive device (NurugoTM Derma) as a first triage to select the skin lesions that require a face-to-face consultation with dermatologists. Herein, we report the results of a novel study that aims to better investigate the performance of NurugoTM. Objectives i) verify whether the NurugoTM can be a communication tool between the General Practitioner (GP) and dermatologist in the first assessment of skin lesions; ii) analyze the degree of diagnostic-therapeutic agreement between dermatologists; iii) estimate the number of potentially serious diagnostic errors. Methods One hundred forty-four images of skin lesions were collected at the Dermatology Outpatient Clinic in Novara using a conventional dermatoscope (instrument F), the NurugoTM (instrument N), and the latter with the interposition of a laboratory slide (instrument V). The images were evaluated in-blind by four dermatologists, and each was asked to make a diagnosis and to specify a possible treatment. Results: Our data show that F gave higher agreement values for all dermatologists, concerning the real clinical diagnosis. Nevertheless, a medium/moderate agreement value was obtained also for N and V instruments and that can be considered encouraging and indicate that all examined tools can potentially be used for the first screening of skin lesions. The total amount of misclassified lesions was limited (especially with the V tool), with up to nine malignant lesions wrongly classified as benign. Conclusions NurugoTM, with adequate training, can be used to build a specific support network between GP and dermatologist or between dermatologists. Furthermore, its use could be extended to the diagnosis and follow-up of other skin diseases, especially for frail patients in emergencies such as the current pandemic context.