The winning score.

Incision lines placed at cosmetic boundaries and/or in rhytids during surgical procedures provide ideal concealment of scars. We suggest the use of a 30-gauge, half-inch needle or alternatively the back edge of a #15 scalpel blade to superficially score the skin to provide markings, which are fine enough to lie exactly within rhytids or at exact cosmetic boundaries such as the nasolabial fold or the junction of the cutaneous and vermillion lip. We measured the average depth of these scores to demonstrate that they are shallow enough to heal without scarring.

Artificial intelligence in the detection of skin cancer.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) in dermatology have demonstrated the potential to improve the accuracy of skin cancer detection. These capabilities may augment current diagnostic processes and improve the approach to the management of skin cancer. To explain this technology, we discuss fundamental terminology, potential benefits, and limitations of AI, and commercial applications relevant to dermatologists. A clear understanding of the technology may help to reduce physician concerns about AI and promote its use in the clinical setting. Ultimately, the development and validation of AI technologies, their approval by regulatory agencies, and widespread adoption by dermatologists and other clinicians may enhance patient care. Technology-augmented detection of skin cancer has the potential to improve quality of life, reduce health care costs by reducing unnecessary procedures, and promote greater access to high-quality skin assessment. Dermatologists play a critical role in the responsible development and deployment of AI capabilities applied to skin cancer.

A review of the evidence for Mohs micrographic surgery. Part 2: basal cell carcinoma.

Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is considered the gold-standard treatment for basal cell carcinoma (BCC) particularly for sites with a high-risk of incomplete excision such as the central face, for tumours with an aggressive growth pattern and consequent unpredictable subclinical extension and for recurrent tumours. However, the process is more time-consuming than for standard excision (SE), and the magnitude of benefit is uncertain. This article aims to provide a more complete picture of current evidence, including a review of cosmetic outcomes, tissue-sparing ability and cost-effectiveness of MMS. Although robust evidence is lacking, there is a large volume of observational data supporting a low recurrence rate after MMS. The risk of incomplete excision and higher recurrence rate of standard excision favours the use of MMS at high-risk sites. There is some low-certainty evidence that MMS results in a smaller defect size compared with SE, and that incomplete excision with SE results in larger defects. Larger defects may affect cosmetic outcome but there is no direct evidence that MMS improves cosmetic outcome compared with SE. There is conflicting evidence regarding the cost of MMS compared with SE, as some studies consider MMS less expensive than SE and others consider it more expensive, which may reflect the healthcare setting. A multicentre 10-year randomized controlled trial comparing MMS and SE in the treatment of high-risk BCC would be desirable, but is unlikely to be feasible or ethical. Collection of robust registry data capturing both MMS and SE outcomes would provide additional long-term outcomes.

A review of Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer. Part 3: Squamous cell carcinoma.

This review presents and discusses the evidence for MMS to treat cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). The MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched; 39 papers were identified for recurrence and 2 papers for cost-effectiveness. We included all clinical trials and observational studies, including retrospective reports, and excluded editorials and systematic reviews or meta-analyses. We categorized the evidence under the following headings: tumour recurrence, specific site outcomes (ear, lip, scalp and periocular), cSCC with perineural invasion, and cost-effectiveness. Although there are many observational studies indicating the potential benefits of MMS in the management of certain cSCCs, no randomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified. The evidence from comparitor studies suggests that MMS has a lower recurrence rate than that of other treatments for cSCC, including standard excision. Many studies identified were single-armed, but did demonstrate a low to very low recurrence rate of cSCC following MMS. A single recent study suggests MMS for intermediate cSCC is highly cost-effective compared with wide local excision when all-in costs are considered. Since the overall quality of included studies was mixed and highly heterogeneous, further methodologically robust studies with comparator arms or comprehensive long-term registry data would be valuable. It would be ideal to employ a definitive multicentre RCT but given the evidence to date and multiple advantages to MMS, the lack of clinical equipoise makes this difficult to justify. Comparison with current modalities would likely not be ethical/achievable on a like-for-like basis given MMS provides 100% margin assessment, enables histological clearance prior to reconstruction, and minimizes the removal of uninvolved tissue.