There is growing evidence that not only the novel coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) but also the COVID‐19 vaccines can cause a variety of skin reactions. In this review article, we provide a brief overview on cutaneous findings that have been observed since the emerging mass COVID‐19 vaccination campaigns all over the world. Unspecific injection‐site reactions very early occurring after the vaccination are most frequent. Type I hypersensitivity reactions (e.g. urticaria, angio‐oedema and anaphylaxis) likely due to allergy to ingredients may rarely occur but can be severe. Type IV hypersensitivity reactions may be observed, including delayed large local skin lesions (“COVID arm”), inflammatory reactions in dermal filler or previous radiation sites or even old BCG scars, and more commonly morbilliform and erythema multiforme‐like rashes. Autoimmune‐mediated skin findings after COVID‐19 vaccination include leucocytoclastic vasculitis, lupus erythematosus and immune thrombocytopenia. Functional angiopathies (chilblain‐like lesions, erythromelalgia) may also be observed. Pityriasis rosea‐like rashes and reactivation of herpes zoster have also been reported after COVID‐19 vaccination. In conclusion, there are numerous cutaneous reaction patterns that may occur following COVID‐19 vaccination, whereby many of these skin findings are of immunological/autoimmunological nature. Importantly, molecular mimicry exists between SARS‐CoV‐2 (e.g. the spike‐protein sequences used to design the vaccines) and human components and may thus explain some COVID‐19 pathologies as well as adverse skin reactions to COVID‐19 vaccinations.

A 6-week course of NB-UVB and UVA1 phototherapy of AE resulted in significant clinical improvement. With regard to efficacy and tolerability, both phototherapeutic modalities may be considered comparably good.

No abstract

BackgroundThe skin is important in the positioning and playing of a musical instrument. During practicing and performing there is a permanent more or less intense contact between the instrument and the musician's skin. Apart from aggravation of predisposed skin diseases (e.g., atopic eczema or psoriasis) due to music-making, specific dermatologic conditions may develop that are directly caused by playing a musical instrument.MethodsTo perform a systematic review on instrument-related skin diseases in musicians we searched the PubMed database without time limits. Furthermore we studied the online bibliography "Occupational diseases of performing artist. A performing arts medicine bibliography. October, 2003" and checked references of all selected articles for relevant papers.ResultsThe most prevalent skin disorders of instrumental musicians, in particular string instrumentalists (e.g., violinists, cellists, guitarists), woodwind players (e.g., flautists, clarinetists), and brass instrumentalists (e.g., trumpeters), include a variety of allergic contact sensitizations (e.g., colophony, nickel, and exotic woods) and irritant (physical-chemical noxae) skin conditions whose clinical presentation and localization are usually specific for the instrument used (e.g., "fiddler's neck", "cellist's chest", "guitar nipple", "flautist's chin"). Apart from common callosities and "occupational marks" (e.g., "Garrod's pads") more or less severe skin injuries may occur in musical instrumentalists, in particular acute and chronic wounds including their complications. Skin infections such as herpes labialis seem to be a more common skin problem in woodwind and brass instrumentalists.ConclusionsSkin conditions may be a significant problem not only in professional instrumentalists, but also in musicians of all ages and ability. Although not life threatening they may lead to impaired performance and occupational hazard. Unfortunately, epidemiological investigations have exclusively been performed on orchestra musicians, though the prevalence of instrument-related skin conditions in other musician groups (e.g., jazz and rock musicians) is also of interest. The practicing clinician should be aware of the special dermatologic problems unique to the musical instrumentalist. Moreover awareness among musicians needs to be raised, as proper technique and conditioning may help to prevent affection of performance and occupational impairment.

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) appears to be a promising technique to study skin in vivo. As part of an exploratory study to investigate UV induced effects non-invasively we aimed to evaluate the kinetics of acute UVB- as well as UVA1 induced skin alterations by means of OCT, and to correlate the results obtained with routine histology. Twelve healthy subjects received daily 60 J/cm2 of UVA1 and 1.5 minimal erythema doses of UVB on their upper back over three consecutive days. One day (24 h) after the last UV exposure, OCT measurements and skin biopsies were performed in four subjects (day 1) on the centre of the irradiated sites and an adjacent non-irradiated control site. The same procedure was performed in four subjects 3 days and 6 days after irradiation, respectively. Prior to OCT assessment two waterproof marks were drawn on the centre of UVB and UVA1 exposed sites and the control site. The OCT scanner, SkinDex 300, was used in the RI1D measurement modus in order to investigate morphological features, epidermal thickness, and scattering coefficients. Immediately after OCT assessment, 4 mm punch biopsies were taken from the previously marked sites. OCT as well as histological examinations performed on day 1, 3, and 6, revealed markedly higher values for epidermal thickness on UVB exposed skin sites, and slightly increased epidermal thickening in UVA1 exposed sites. UVB exposed sites showed disruption of the entrance signal in the B-scan of OCT resulting in a thickened layer with a signal-poor centre corresponding to hyperkeratosis and parakeratosis as confirmed by routine histology. Surprisingly, the mean scattering coefficients of the epidermis were slightly lower on UVA1 exposed sites, as compared to non-irradiated skin. By contrast, the scattering coefficient of the upper dermis of UVA1 irradiated skin was hardly altered. Moreover, the scattering coefficient of the upper dermis assessed on UVB exposed skin on day 1 was clearly smaller than the scattering coefficient observed on non-irradiated and UVA1 exposed skin. Conclusively, it was possible to demonstrate by means of OCT differences of epidermal thickness and pathological features of the stratum corneum following UV exposure. UVA1 induced epidermal pigmentation as well as UVB induced dermal inflammation may affect the light attenuation in the tissue indicated by a decrease of the scattering coefficient. OCT seems to be a useful tool to monitor UV induced effects in vivo.