Talk:Skin tag/Archive 1

Archive 1

Commonness in females

Resolved

 – Contentious unsourced material removed w/o opposition.

The article says that

They are more common in people with diabetes mellitus, and in women.

However, one of the linked articles (on emedicine) states that "An equal prevalence of acrochordons exists in males and females." This same article mentions the 59% by age 70 stat. Does anyone have a contradictory source before I change it?

No one's commented with a source, so I snipped the "and in women."--Starwed 05:52, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Removing them [Please do not add more comments here]

Resolved

 – Off-topic and against WP:NOT

I am a surgeon and I regularly snip these off at the patient's request. I rarely use an anaesthetic injectionn as this is more painful than removing it quickly with some very sharp scissors. It does not seem to be painful to grasp them with forceps and 'the snip' is too quick to hurt. I would not recommend people remove things themselves because there are some skin lumps which are not harmless and it would be ideal to have them checked first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.1.80 (talk) 05:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed 2 of them on my body. I also(like many people) was affraid it's like a tumor, so I pierced it ith my nails and removed it from my skin. It bleeded a bit, but it wasn't as painfull as piercing your skin (since they where only very small).

As a result the small 'wound' dried up and healed. Do you think removing them like that is a good or bad idea? Meaning, will they return? Should the base be removed as well, or only the little ball on the top? the base seems to be in my skin, and seems painfull to remove. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.176.179.123 (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

First of all, wikipedia is not a doctor. Second of all, it's just a piece of skin. You're fine as is, but consult a doctor before doing stupid shit like that again. 62.106.50.129 (talk) 23:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a middle aged male with a few in armpits, a couple on my areola (nipple). My doctor said they can be removed even by myself but it may hurt or bleed a lot. I removed the biggest one in my armpit (still tiny, about the size of a pencil lead) using nail clippers after putting rubbing alcohol on it. When squeezing the clippers slowly, I winced because I could feel it and it was very sensitive, there's definitely a nerve in there. So I just snipped quickly, it didn't bleed much and healed very quickly. The snip felt like a pinch in a sensitive area, but only hurt for a very short time, minutes if that. I haven't removed any others yet, they're so small they don't really bother me, just the bigger one was chafing sometimes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.147.251 (talk) 16:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) This discussion should not continue here. Per WP:TALK, Wikipedia talk pages exist for the sole purpose of improving Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia is not a general public forum for discussion, nor is it a source of advice or guidance. Furthermore, we cannot give medical, legal or other regulated-professional advice here, under US and many other legal systems. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Accuracy of treatment section

Resolved

 – Article accuracy issued raised in more detail in later thread.

Wouldn't the same treatments for removing warts be the same for skin tags? I say this because there's over-the-counter treatments available for wart removal such as acids and home cryosurgery kits. --YoungFreud 06:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

From my personal experience, no. Skin tags are not warts or benign tumors like this article states. They are pieces of skin that form as a result of the friction, heat and moisture that occur in the areas of the body where they form. They are just stretched-out pieces of skin. Putting acid on the will get the same results as putting acid on any other part of your skin.

Not really... I've got one that I was definitely born with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.195.186.43 (talk) 05:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, if the article is inaccurate and you can reference your work, why not fix the article? 70.184.39.107 (talk) 04:43, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

That, and the article already covers treatment options, which do in fact overlap with those of warts, so the original issue is moot. The question of whether the article is in fact correct about skin tags being benign tumors remains open. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

My Dermatology text describes skin tags as "skin colored pedunculated papilloma (polyp)". The Merriam-Webster Medline-Plus medical dictionary describes a papilloma as, "a benign tumor (as a wart or condyloma) resulting from an overgrowth of epithelial tissue on papillae of vascularized connective tissue (as of the skin). So with that definition I would say that yes, skin tags can be classified as a "benign tumor".--Tgottsdo (talk) 01:21, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Skin tags that grow over time

The top of this article mentions that skin tags don't change over time. But what if they grow (however slowly that may be) over time? Not in alarming or painful ways or anything. I have tiny scattered skin tags that have grown long, and at least two have in the past weakened at the base and fallen off, only to start growing again from the root. I have at least seven on my left hand alone and at least two on my right hand, though none have reached any significant size to be uncomfortable. As this article stands, it doesn't seem to cover all my standing curiosities about skin tags. - Gilgamesh (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

ICD-9 Coding for acrochordon (skin tag)

Although an acrochordon is classified as a benign neoplasm, it should be coded as a skin tag--which has a specific ICD-9 listing (701.9). Tags are listed under a separate CPT Code (88304).

Has this been fixed yet? — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Appears to be done. SilkTork *^YES! 09:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)