This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Theodore A. Tromovitch, MD; Samuel J. Stegman, MD
350 Parnassus Ave San Francisco, CA 94117

Arch Dermatol. 1984;120(10):1279.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

Dr Chernosky makes an excellent point. In our review article¹ and our book by the same title,² we discussed conditions that are usually considered "cosmetic" but sometimes are indeed "medical," such as intradermal nevi, telangiectasias, and the severe hypertrophic and fibrotic scarring of postconglobate acne. On the other hand, there are conditions discussed that are usually "medical" and only secondarily cosmetic. These include the management of such conditions such as painful or keloidal scarring, syringomata, and sebaceous hyperplasia. However, the tenor of the entire article was that of cosmetic dermatologic surgery procedures.

There is and always will be a need to explain and justify to third-party carriers and malpractice carriers exactly what each procedure represents. Some blepharoplasties are necessary to correct loss of upper lateral vision. However, most blepharoplasties are for cosmesis. There are flaps and grafts that are for reconstruction after the removal of a malignant neoplasm. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?