Lentigo maligna (melanoma): A systematic review and meta-analysis on surgical techniques and presurgical mapping by reflectance confocal microscopy.

Because of an increased risk of local recurrence following surgical treatment of lentigo maligna (melanoma) (LM/LMM), the optimal surgical technique is still a matter of debate. We aimed to evaluate the effect of different surgical techniques and reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) on local recurrence and survival outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases through 20 May 2022. Randomized and observational studies with ≥10 lesions were eligible for inclusion. Bias assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies instrument. Meta-analysis was performed for local recurrence, as there were insufficient events for the other clinical outcomes. We included 41 studies with 5059 LM and 1271 LMM. Surgical techniques included wide local excision (WLE) (n = 1355), staged excision (n = 2442) and Mohs' micrographic surgery (MMS) (n = 2909). Six studies included RCM. The guideline-recommended margin was insufficient in 21.6%-44.6% of LM/LMM. Local recurrence rate was lowest for patients treated by MMS combined with immunohistochemistry (<1%; 95% CI, 0.3%-1.9%), and highest for WLE (13%; 95% CI, 7.2%-21.6%). The mean follow-up varied from 27 to 63 months depending on surgical technique with moderate to high heterogeneity for MMS and WLE. Handheld-RCM decreased both the rate of positive histological margins (p < 0.0001) and necessary surgical stages (p < 0.0001). The majority of regional (17/25) and distant (34/43) recurrences occurred in patients treated by WLE. Melanoma-associated mortality was low (1.5%; 32/2107), and more patients died due to unrelated causes (6.7%; 107/1608). This systematic review shows a clear reduction in local recurrences using microscopically controlled surgical techniques over WLE. The use of HH-RCM showed a trend in the reduction in incomplete resections and local recurrences even when used with WLE. Due to selection bias, heterogeneity, low prevalence of stage III/IV disease and limited survival data, it was not possible to determine the effect of the different surgical techniques on survival outcomes.

Interrater and intrarater agreement of confocal microscopy imaging in diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) imaging can be used to diagnose and subtype basal cell carcinoma (BCC) but relies on individual morphologic pattern recognition that might vary among users. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the inter-rater and intrarater agreement of RCM in correctly diagnosing and subtyping BCC. METHODS: In this prospective study, we evaluated the inter-rater and intrarater agreement of RCM on BCC presence and subtype among three raters with varying experience who independently assessed static images of 48 RCM cases twice with four-week interval (T1 and T2). Histopathologic confirmation of presence and subtype of BCC from surgical excision specimen was defined as the reference standard. RESULTS: The inter-rater agreement of RCM for BCC presence showed an agreement of 82% at T1 and 84% at T2. The agreements for subtyping BCC were lower (52% for T1 and 47% for T2). The intrarater agreement of RCM for BCC presence showed an observed agreement that varied from 79% to 92%. The observed agreements for subtyping varied from 56% to 71%. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our results show that RCM is reliable in correctly diagnosing BCC based on the assessment of static RCM images. RCM could potentially play an important role in BCC management if accurate subtyping will be achieved. Therefore, future clinical studies on reliability and specific RCM features for BCC subtypes are required.

One-stop-shop with confocal microscopy imaging vs. standard care for surgical treatment of basal cell carcinoma: an open-label, noninferiority, randomized controlled multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Routine punch biopsies are considered to be standard care for diagnosing and subtyping basal cell carcinoma (BCC) when clinically suspected. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the efficacy of a one-stop-shop concept using in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) imaging as a diagnostic tool vs. standard care for surgical treatment in patients with clinically suspected BCC. METHODS: In this open-label, parallel-group, noninferiority, randomized controlled multicentre trial we enrolled patients with clinically suspected BCC at two tertiary referral centres in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned to the RCM one-stop-shop (diagnosing and subtyping using RCM followed by direct surgical excision) or standard care (planned excision based on the histological diagnosis and subtype of a punch biopsy). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with tumour-free margins after surgical excision of BCC. RESULTS: Of the 95 patients included, 73 (77%) had a BCC histologically confirmed using a surgical excision specimen. All patients (40 of 40, 100%) in the one-stop-shop group had tumour-free margins. In the standard-care group tumour-free margins were found in all but two patients (31 of 33, 94%). The difference in the proportion of patients with tumour-free margins after BCC excision between the one-stop-shop group and the standard-care group was -0·06 (90% confidence interval -0·17-0·01), establishing noninferiority. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed new treatment strategy seems suitable in facilitating early diagnosis and direct treatment for patients with BCC, depending on factors such as availability of RCM, size and site of the lesion, patient preference and whether direct surgical excision is feasible.