Dermatological surgery: an update on suture materials and techniques. Part 2.

This is the second part of a two-part series summarizing the latest evidence related to suture materials and wound closure techniques in dermatological surgery. We critically appraised evidence focusing on the following consequences of suture choice: scar/cosmesis, pain, patient satisfaction, cost, infection and wound complications. We searched the databases MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase using the keywords 'skin surgery', 'dermatological surgery', 'sutures', 'braided sutures', 'monofilament sutures' and 'antibacterial sutures' to identify relevant English-language articles. This part of the review assesses the evidence for different types of buried sutures, including braided vs. monofilament sutures, longer-absorbing sutures and antibacterial sutures. The majority of trials were noted to be of poor quality, single-centre (thus lacking external validity) and underpowered, which presents challenges in comparing suture techniques in skin surgery. Future large-scale, multicentre, randomized trials are needed, with both surgeon and patient-assessed validated outcomes.

Dermatological surgery: an update on suture materials and techniques. Part 1.

Significant variation exists in the surgical suture materials and techniques used for dermatological surgery. Many wound-closure techniques are now practised, including use of sutures, staples and topical adhesives. The focus of our review article is to summarize the latest evidence relating to suture materials and wound-closure techniques, considering the following areas: scar/cosmesis, pain, patient satisfaction, cost, infection and wound complications. We searched the databases Medline, PubMed and Embase using the keywords 'skin surgery', 'dermatologic surgery', 'sutures', 'suture techniques', 'suturing techniques' and 'surgical techniques' to identify relevant English-language articles. Absorbable superficial sutures may be a preferred alternative to nonabsorbable sutures by both patients and surgeons. Subcuticular sutures may be preferable to simple interrupted sutures for superficial wound closure, and there may also be a role for skin staples in dermatological surgery, particularly on the scalp. However, there remains limited evidence specific to dermatological surgery supporting the use of particular suture materials and suturing techniques. Further high-quality research is required, including multicentre randomized trials with larger cohorts.

Treatment of cutaneous basal cell carcinoma with combined laser extirpation and methyl aminolevulinic acid: five-year success rates.

INTRODUCTION: Basal cell carcinoma is the most common cancer. Excisional surgery is associated with a high clearance rate, at the expense of significant functional and aesthetic morbidity, especially within the T-zone or for extensive lesions. We report five-year follow-up outcomes for carbon dioxide laser extirpation of cutaneous basal cell carcinoma, assisted by immediate methyl aminolevulinate photodynamic therapy and cost-benefit considerations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort database analysis of adult patients with biopsy-proven primary cutaneous basal cell carcinoma, completing five years of follow-up. Direct per-lesion cost was compared with conventional wide local excision. Patients with morphoeic basal cell carcinoma were excluded. RESULTS: Treated lesions were up to 1% total body surface area and up to 3.8mm (1.38 ± 0.695cm, mean ± standard deviation) in biopsy-proven depth. At the five-year follow-up mark, 93.6% of treated areas remained free of recurrence. Nodular basal cell carcinoma was the most common subtype (41.5%). A mean tumour depth greater than 2 ± 0.872mm was significantly associated with recurrence (Mann-Whitney, p = 0.0487). For a service delivered through the NHS at 2015 prices, we report a 43% saving, equating to a saving of £235 per basal cell carcinoma or a national annualised saving of £70 million by 2025 for the NHS. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that CO2-assisted photodynamic therapy is non-inferior to excision but may offer better functional and cosmetic preservation at a fraction of the direct like for like cost of operative surgery. Investigation of this method by randomised controlled methodology is warranted.

Shave Excision Versus Elliptical Excision of Nonpigmented Intradermal Melanocytic Nevi: Comparative Assessment of Recurrence and Cosmetic Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Nonpigmented intradermal melanocytic nevi (IMN) are benign lesions often removed for cosmetic reasons. There is no consensus as to the best technique for IMN excision. OBJECTIVE: To compare cosmetic outcomes and risk of recurrence after shave excision versus elliptical excision of IMN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, patients underwent shave excision or elliptical excision with sutured closure of IMN of the face or back. Recurrence, patient satisfaction, cosmetic outcome, postoperative discomfort, scar size, discoloration, and presence of hypertrophic or keloid scars were evaluated at 3, 6, and 9 months. RESULTS: Overall, 145 nevi were removed from 45 patients (86.7% women, mean age 52.1 ± 12.5 years). The recurrence rate was 11.7%, occurring only after shave excision; 94.1% of recurrences were observed at 3-month follow-up. Shave excision was associated with less discomfort 48 hours after intervention but a greater likelihood of involved lateral and deep margins (p < .001). Scars were larger after elliptical excision and suture than after shave excision (p < .01). The mean patient satisfaction was higher in the shave excision group (p < .004). CONCLUSION: Shave excision of IMN is associated with higher rates of involved surgical margins and recurrence than elliptical excision but provides superior cosmesis and patient satisfaction.

A Novel Absorbable Stapler Provides Patient-Reported Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Noninferior to Subcuticular Skin Closure: A Prospective, Single-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Deep dermal suturing is critical for scar quality outcomes. The authors evaluated a new, fast medical device for dermal suturing, with the hypothesis of noninferiority with regard to clinical scar and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A prospective, patient-blind, randomized, multicenter noninferiority study in 26 French hospitals was conducted. Patients were randomized 1:1 to suturing with conventional thread or a semiautomatic stapler. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale was rated at 3 months for primary endpoint effectiveness. Secondary endpoints were cost-effectiveness of the two suturing methods, prevalence of complications, suturing/operating time, Observer Scar Assessment Scale and Patient Scar Assessment Scale score, scar aesthetic quality 18 months after surgery, and occupational exposure to blood during surgery. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-four patients were enrolled, 660 were randomized, and 649 constituted the full analysis (stapler arm, n = 324; needle arm, n = 325). Primary endpoint Patient Scar Assessment Scale score in the stapler arm was not inferior to that in the needle arm at 3 months or after 18 months. The mean operating time was 180 minutes in the stapler arm and 179 minutes in the needle arm (p = not significant). The mean suturing time was significantly lower in the stapler arm (p < 0.001). There were seven occupational exposures to blood in the needle arm and one in the stapler arm. The two arms did not differ significantly in terms of complications (p = 0.41). The additional cost of using the device was &OV0556;51.57 for the complete-case population. CONCLUSION: Wound healing outcome was no worse than with conventional suturing using a semiautomatic stapler and associated with less occupational exposure to blood. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, I.

Skin Cancer Excision Is More Efficient and Cost Effectivein a Specialist Secondary Care Service.

Aim To compare the relative efficiencies of skin excisions in primary and secondary care. Methods We compared the benign: malignant ratio for specimens referred by General Practice, General Surgery and the Skin Cancer Service to the regional pathology laboratory over one month. We used cost minimization analysis to compare the relative efficiencies of the services. Results 620 excisions were received: 139 from General Practice, 118 from General Surgery and 363 from the Skin Cancer Service. The number (%) of malignant lesions was 13 (9.4%) from General Practice, 18 (15.2%) from General Surgery and 137 (37.7%) from the Skin Cancer Service. Excision was cheaper in General Practice at €84.58 as compared to €97.49 in the hospital day surgical unit. However, the cost per malignant lesion excised was €1779.80 in general practice versus €381.78 in the Skin Cancer Service. Conclusion Our results indicate that moving skin cancer treatment to General Practice may result in an excess of benign excisions and therefore be both less efficient and less cost effective.

Subcuticular sutures for skin closure in non-obstetric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Following surgery, surgical wounds can be closed using a variety of devices including sutures (subcuticular or transdermal), staples and tissue adhesives. Subcuticular sutures are intradermal stitches (placed immediately below the epidermal layer). The increased availability of synthetic absorbable filaments (stitches which are absorbed by the body and do not have to be removed) has led to an increased use of subcuticular sutures. However, in non-obstetric surgery, there is still controversy about whether subcuticular sutures increase the incidence of wound complications. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and acceptability of subcuticular sutures for skin closure in non-obstetric surgery. SEARCH METHODS: In March 2019, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials which compared subcuticular sutures with any other methods for skin closure in non-obstetric surgery were included in the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently identified the trials, extracted data and carried out risk of bias and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 66 studies (7487 participants); 11 included trials had more than two arms. Most trials had poorly-reported methodology, meaning that it is unclear whether they were at high risk of bias. Most trials compared subcuticular sutures with transdermal sutures, skin staples or tissue adhesives. Most outcomes prespecified in the review protocol were reported. The certainty of evidence varied from high to very low in the comparisons of subcuticular sutures with transdermal sutures or staples and tissue adhesives; the certainty of the evidence for the comparison with surgical tapes and zippers was low to very low. Most evidence was downgraded for imprecision or risk of bias. Although the majority of studies enrolled people who underwent CDC class 1 (clean) surgeries, two-thirds of participants were enrolled in studies which included CDC class 2 to 4 surgeries, such as appendectomies and gastrointestinal surgeries. Most participants were adults in a hospital setting. Subcuticular sutures versus transdermal sutures There may be little difference in the incidence of SSI (risk ratio (RR) 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.52; 3107 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether subcuticular sutures reduce wound complications (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.40 to 1.71; 1489 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Subcuticular sutures probably improve patient satisfaction (score from 1 to 10) (at 30 days; MD 1.60, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.88; 290 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Wound closure time is probably longer when subcuticular sutures are used (MD 5.81 minutes; 95% CI 5.13 to 6.49 minutes; 585 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Subcuticular sutures versus skin staples There is moderate-certainty evidence that, when compared with skin staples, subcuticular sutures probably have little effect on SSI (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.01; 4163 participants); but probably decrease the incidence of wound complications (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.98; 2973 participants). Subcuticular sutures are associated with slightly higher patient satisfaction (score from 1 to 5) (MD 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.30; 1232 participants; high-certainty evidence). Wound closure time may also be longer compared with staples (MD 0.30 to 5.50 minutes; 1384 participants; low-certainty evidence). Subcuticular sutures versus tissue adhesives, surgical tapes and zippers There is moderate-certainty evidence showing no clear difference in the incidence of SSI between participants treated with subcuticular sutures and those treated with tissue adhesives (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; 869 participants). There is also no clear difference in the incidence of wound complications (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.11; 1058 participants; low-certainty evidence). Subcuticular sutures may also achieve lower patient satisfaction ratings (score from 1 to 10) (MD -2.05, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.05; 131 participants) (low-certainty evidence). In terms of SSI incidence, the evidence is uncertain when subcuticular sutures are compared with surgical tapes (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.40 to 4.27; 354 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or surgical zippers (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.08 to 8.48; 424 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little difference in the incidence of wound complications between participants treated with subcuticular sutures and those treated with surgical tapes (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.34; 492 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether subcuticular sutures reduce the risk of wound complications compared with surgical zippers (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.04; 424 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether it takes longer to close a wound with subcuticular sutures compared with tissue adhesives (MD -0.34 to 10.39 minutes; 895 participants), surgical tapes (MD 0.74 to 6.36 minutes; 169 participants) or zippers (MD 4.38 to 8.25 minutes; 424 participants) (very low-certainty evidence). No study reported results for patient satisfaction compared with surgical tapes or zippers. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no clear difference in the incidence of SSI for subcuticular sutures in comparison with any other skin closure methods. Subcuticular sutures probably reduce wound complications compared with staples, and probably improve patient satisfaction compared with transdermal sutures or staples. However, tissue adhesives may improve patient satisfaction compared with subcuticular sutures, and transdermal sutures and skin staples may be quicker to apply than subcuticular sutures. The quality of the evidence ranged from high to very low; evidence for almost all comparisons was subject to some limitations. There seems to be no need for additional new trials to explore the comparison with staples because there are high-quality studies with large sample sizes and some ongoing studies. However, there is a need for studies exploring the comparisons with transdermal sutures, tissue adhesives, tapes and zippers, with high-quality studies and large sample sizes, including long-term assessments.

Review and Update on Evidence-Based Surgical Treatment Recommendations for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer.

Nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in the United States. Surgery is considered the gold standard treatment. Techniques include curettage and electrodesiccation, surgical excision, and Mohs micrographic surgery. While each is effective, there are relative advantages and disadvantages with respect to cost, time, quality of life, and role in patients with limited life expectancy. Preventing local tumor recurrence is the primary objective; however, recurrence rates are based on retrospective data, and high-quality comparator studies assessing effectiveness are scarce. Prospective and randomized controlled trials are imperative to create comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations for the surgical management of NMSC.

Body Contouring Surgery after Massive Weight Loss: Excess Skin, Body Satisfaction, and Qualification for Reimbursement in a Dutch Post-Bariatric Surgery Population.

BACKGROUND: Body contouring surgery improves quality of life, weight loss, and body image after bariatric surgery. It is unclear why only a minority of the post-bariatric surgery population undergoes body contouring surgery. This study assesses overhanging skin, body satisfaction, and qualification for reimbursement of body contouring surgery in a Dutch post-bariatric surgery population. METHODS: Post-bariatric patients were selected from a prospective database. Electronic questionnaires evaluated demographics, desire for body contouring surgery, excess skin, and satisfaction with their body. RESULTS: A total of 590 patients were included: 368 patients (62.4 percent) desired body contouring surgery, 157 (26.6 percent) did not and 65 (11.0 percent) had undergone body contouring surgery. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the percentage of patients who met the qualifications for reimbursement. Patients who desired body contouring surgery had more body parts affected by overhanging skin and more often rated the overhanging skin with a Pittsburgh Rating Scale grade 3 compared with patients without a desire to undergo body contouring surgery. The plastic surgeon was never consulted by 39.1 percent of the "desire" population; 44.1 percent of these patients met the weight criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Post-bariatric patients who desired body contouring surgery had more excess skin than patients without a desire and were less satisfied with their body. Almost half of these patients never consulted a plastic surgeon, partly because of incorrect assumptions regarding reimbursement. Plastic surgeons (together with bariatric teams) should better inform these patients about body contouring surgery possibilities.

The doctor's office is the best setting for most cutaneous procedures.

Although most dermatologic procedures are done in an office setting, some providers are performing them instead in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). This relocation of care comes with significantly higher expenses for patients and insurers. Compounding the issue of increased costs is the paucity of evidence demonstrating better outcomes associated with the use of ASCs. The most common cutaneous procedures have low complication rates when performed in an office setting and regular use of ASCs for these procedures is not justified.

Comparison of Costs and Outcomes for In-Office and Operating Room Excision of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: With increasing health care expenses and limited resources, it is important to evaluate potential means of reducing cost while maintaining efficacy and safety. The purpose of our study was to compare the cost and outcomes of surgical excision of nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) in the operating room versus an outpatient procedure clinic. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing excision of biopsy-confirmed NMSC at the Miami Veterans Affairs Hospital between December 1, 2015, and December 1, 2016, was completed. Patients treated in the operating room and procedure clinic were included. Treatment outcomes were assessed for all identified patients. Patients undergoing excision and primary closure were included for cost comparison.Procedure costs were estimated using Current Procedural Terminology codes for treatments provided and the 2017 conversion factor of $35.7751. If a second operation for positive margins was necessary, cost to treat the lesion included costs from both procedures. If multiple lesions were treated, total cost was divided by the number of lesions to calculate cost per lesion treated. Costs per lesion managed in the operating room and clinic were compared using the Student t test. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients underwent excision of 94 NMSCs in the operating room. Nineteen patients underwent excision of 20 NMSCs in the procedure clinic. One patient treated in the clinic required re-excision in the operating room with frozen section for a positive margin.Thirty-three patients managed in the operating room and 19 patients managed in the procedure clinic were included for cost analysis. Average costs per lesion excised in the operating room and procedure clinic were calculated to be $1923.43 ± 616.27 and $674.88 ± 575.22, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Excellent oncologic outcomes were achieved for both operating room and procedure clinic excision. Excision in the operating room excision was significantly more expensive than in the procedure clinic. Excision in a procedure clinic offers an opportunity to reduce costs while maintaining quality care.

Skin shop: A new model for high-volume skin cancer care.

INTRODUCTION: Non-melanoma skin cancer incidence is increasing in New Zealand. Increased cost of care has led to service pressure and a review of models of care. A high-volume skin surgery service at Waikato Hospital has been developed to reduce service costs. This study examines the oncological safety of the new model. METHODS: Prospective data for all skin lesions excised were collected from December 2014 to December 2016. Primary outcomes were rate of complete excision, rate of incomplete excision and rate of narrow excision. RESULTS: A total of 2076 lesions were excised: 92% were complete, 4.2% were narrow and 3.2% were incomplete. CONCLUSION: The rate of narrow and incomplete excisions was low in a service delivered by supervised surgical registrars. The Skin Shop model is safe, inexpensive and suitable for adaptation to safely reduce the cost of skin cancer surgery.

Pathological assessment of resection specimens after neoadjuvant therapy for metastatic melanoma.

Background: Clinical trials have recently evaluated safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy among patients with surgically resectable regional melanoma metastases. To capture informative prognostic data connected to pathological response in such trials, it is critical to standardize pathologic assessment and reporting of tumor response after this treatment. Methods: The International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium meetings in 2016 and 2017 assembled pathologists from academic centers to develop consensus guidelines for pathologic examination and reporting of surgical specimens from AJCC (8th edition) stage IIIB/C/D or oligometastatic stage IV melanoma patients treated with neoadjuvant-targeted or immune therapy. Patterns of pathologic response are provided context to inform these guidelines. Results: Based on our collective experience and guided by efforts in well-established neoadjuvant settings like breast cancer, procedures directing handling of pre- and post-neoadjuvant therapy-treated melanoma specimens are provided to facilitate comparison of findings across different trials and centers. Definitions of pathologic response are provided together with guidelines for reporting and quantifying the extent of pathologic response. Finally, the spectrum of histopathologic responses observed following neoadjuvant-targeted and immune-checkpoint therapy is described and illustrated. Conclusions: Standardizing pathologic evaluation of resected melanoma metastases following neoadjuvant-targeted or immune-checkpoint therapy allows more robust stratification of patient outcomes. This includes recognizing the spectrum of histopathologic response patterns to neoadjuvant therapy and a standard approach to grading pathologic responses. Such an approach will facilitate comparison of results across clinical trials and inform ongoing correlative studies into the mechanisms of response and resistance to agents applied in the neoadjuvant setting.

Surgical smoke: Risk assessment and mitigation strategies.

BACKGROUND: Although many dermatologic surgeons are aware of the risks of surgical smoke, many do not use hazard reduction strategies. OBJECTIVE: To identify the infectious, inhalational, chemical, and mutagenic risks of surgical smoke in dermatologic procedures and suggest evidence-based hazard reduction strategies. METHODS: A review of articles indexed for MEDLINE on PubMed using the keywords surgical smoke, dermatology, surgical mask, respirator, smoke evacuator, and guidelines in 13 combinations was performed by using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocols. The review included data from 45 articles from the dermatology, surgery, infectious disease, obstetrics, and cancer biology literature. RESULTS: There are risks associated with surgical smoke, and although some dermatologists are aware of these risks, many are not using hazard reduction strategies such as smoke evacuators and surgical masks. LIMITATIONS: Most of the data regarding the hazards of surgical smoke and methods for smoke safety are derived from in vitro and in vivo studies in nonhumans, as well as from resources outside of the dermatology literature. CONCLUSION: Standardized guidelines for surgical smoke safety should be implemented in the dermatology community and residency curriculum.

The smart approach: feasibility of lentigo maligna superficial margin assessment with hand-held reflectance confocal microscopy technology.

BACKGROUND: Lentigo maligna may be challenging to clear surgically. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feasibility of using superficial skin cuts as RCM imaging anchors for attaining negative surgical margins in lentigo maligna. METHODS: Included patients presented with lentigo maligna near cosmetically sensitive facial structures. We evaluated, with hand-held-RCM, microscopic clearance of melanoma beyond its dermoscopically detected edges. Evaluated margins were annotated using shallow skin cuts. If a margin was positive at 'first-step' RCM evaluation, we sequentially advanced the margin radially outward at that segment by 2-mm intervals until an RCM-negative margin was identified. Prior to final surgical excision, we placed sutures at the outmost skin cuts to allow comparison of RCM and histopathological margin assessments. Primary outcome measure was histopathological verification that RCM-negative margins were clear of melanoma. RESULTS: The study included 126 first-step margin evaluations in 23 patients, median age 70 years (range: 43-91). Seventeen patients (74%) had primary in-situ melanoma and six (26%) invasive melanoma, mean thickness 0.3 mm (range 0.2-0.4 mm). Six cases (26%) showed complete negative RCM margins on 'first-step', 11 (48%) were negative at 'second-step', and four (17%) at 'third-step'. In two additional cases (9%), margins clearance could not be determined via RCM due to widespread dendritic cells proliferation. The RCM-negative margins in all 21 cases proved clear of melanoma on histopathology. Of the 15 cases that returned at 1-year follow-up, none showed any residual melanoma on dermoscopic and RCM examinations. Interobserver reproducibility showed fair agreement between bedside RCM reader and blinded remote-site reader, with Spearman's rho of 0.48 and Cohen's kappa of 0.43; using bedside reader as reference, the remote reader's sensitivity was 92% and specificity 57% in positive margin detection. CONCLUSIONS: Margin mapping of lentigo maligna with hand-held-RCM, using superficial skin cuts, appears feasible. This approach needs validation by larger studies.

Assessing the outcomes, risks, and costs of local versus general anesthesia: A review with implications for cutaneous surgery.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data providing direct comparison of outcomes, complications, and costs between general and local anesthesia in cutaneous surgery. OBJECTIVE: Analyze the literature from dermatologic and other specialties to compare outcomes, risks, and costs of general and local anesthesia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of case comparison studies from other specialties comparing outcomes, risks, and/or costs in local versus general anesthesia was performed. A review of the literature from dermatology and other specialties was included. RESULTS: A total of 51 studies were selected; 41 of them directly examined outcomes in procedures performed under local and general anesthesia, and none found a significant difference in outcomes. A total of 41 studies measured adverse effects. Of these, 15 studies (36.6%) report significantly better outcomes between the 2 techniques. Only 2 studies (4.9%) report significantly improved outcomes with use of general anesthesia; 15 of 36 studies (41.7%) report fewer adverse events in local anesthesia. Of the 13 studies that examined costs, all (100%) found significantly decreased costs with use of local anesthesia. LIMITATIONS: These data cannot be seamlessly applied to all cases of cutaneous surgery. CONCLUSION: Local anesthesia techniques provide outcomes equal to or better than general anesthesia and with significantly lower costs.

An ecological study of skin biopsies and skin cancer treatment procedures in the United States Medicare population, 2000 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: Analyses of skin cancer procedures adjusted for population changes are needed. OBJECTIVE: To describe trends in skin cancer-related biopsies and procedures in Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: An ecological study of Medicare claims for skin biopsies and skin cancer procedures in 2000 to 2015. RESULTS: Biopsies increased 142%, and skin cancer procedures increased 56%. Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) utilization increased on the head/neck, hands/feet, and genitalia (increasing from 11% to 27% of all treatment procedures) but was low on the trunk/extremities (increasing from 1% to 4%). Adjusted for increased Medicare enrollment (+36%) between 2000 and 2015, the number of biopsies and MMS procedures performed per 1000 beneficiaries increased (from 56 to 99 and from 5 to 15, respectively), whereas the number of excisions and destructions changed minimally (from 18 to 16 and from 19 to 18, respectively). Growth in biopsies and MMS procedures slowed between each time period studied: 4.3 additional biopsies per year and 0.9 additional MMS procedures per year per 1000 beneficiaries between 2000 and 2007, 2.2 and 0.5 more between 2008 and 2011, and 0.5 and 0.3 more between 2012 and 2015, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Medicare claims-level data do not provide patient-level or nonsurgical treatment information. CONCLUSIONS: The increased number of skin cancer procedures performed was largely the result of Medicare population growth over time. MMS utilization increased primarily on high- and medium-risk and functionally and cosmetically significant locations where tissue sparing and maximizing cure are critical.