scholarly journals Modified peripheral and central Mohs micrographic surgery for improved margin control in extramammary Paget disease

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 71-73
Author(s):  
Michael S. Chang ◽  
Patrick M. Mulvaney ◽  
Melissa J. Danesh ◽  
Colleen M. Feltmate ◽  
Chrysalyne D. Schmults

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-53
Author(s):  
Daniel Bernstein ◽  
Sara Giddings ◽  
Hooman Khorasani

Background: Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is an important part of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) management but may even be useful for tumors that cannot be cleared in an office setting.  There are sparse reports of MMS for peripheral margin control in the dermatology literature but various techniques have been reported.Case 1: 58-year-old male with morpheaform basal cell carcinoma of the left midface treated with MMS peripheral margin control followed by facial plastic surgery central tumor extirpation and defect repair.Case 2: 56-year-old female with recurrent morpheaform BCC of the scalp treated with MMS peripheral margin control followed by facial plastic surgery central tumor extirpation and defect repair.Case 3: 73-year-old male with multiply recurrent SCC of the right lower extremity treated with MMS peripheral margin control followed by above the knee amputation.Conclusions:  MMS peripheral margin control followed by central tumor extirpation and defect reconstruction at a later date in the operating room is an option for deeply invasive, large and aggressive NMSC.  Benefits include decreased time under general anesthesia and superior rates of tumor clearance.  In the interim, the peripheral defect between the central tumor and healthy outer tissue can be sutured closed to decrease patient morbidity.



2013 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 632-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung Min Bae ◽  
Yoon Young Choi ◽  
Heesu Kim ◽  
Byung Ho Oh ◽  
Mi Ryung Roh ◽  
...  






2009 ◽  
Vol 2009 ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Doufekas ◽  
T. J. Duncan ◽  
K. M. Williamson ◽  
S. Varma ◽  
D. Nunns

Introduction. Dermatofibrosarcoma Protuberans (DFSP) is a rare cutaneous tumour of low/intermediate malignant potential, which occasionally arises on the vulva. Historically, the treatment has been wide local excision (WLE). Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is now recommended to ensure precise margin control. MMS to treat DFSP of the trunk and extremities is well documented. However, no report to date has described its use in vulval DFSP.Case History. A 39 year old woman presented with a longstanding nodule in the left labium majus. Histology after surgical removal showed an incompletely excised DFSP. MMS was undertaken with primary closure of the defect. Three years following treatment there is no evidence of recurrence.Discussion. The local recurrence rate of DFSP after WLE ranges from 0–75%. Finger-like projections from DFSP into surrounding tissue often results in incomplete excision. Representative vertical sections used in WLE assess less than 1% of the total tumour margin. MMS uses systematic horizontal sectioning. 100% of the tumour margin is microscopically examined. MMS is now advocated to ensure precise margin control.



2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 733-738
Author(s):  
Mike C.M. Zon ◽  
José D. Waa ◽  
Mitko Veta ◽  
Gertruud A.M. Krekels


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (02) ◽  
pp. 166-175
Author(s):  
Anaïs L. Carniciu ◽  
Nina Jovanovic ◽  
Alon Kahana

AbstractPeriocular skin is highly prone to malignancies, especially basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas. Because of the complex anatomy and eye-protecting functions of the periocular tissues, treatment of these cancers requires special considerations. Mohs micrographic surgery is usually the treatment of choice, whenever possible, in order to enhance margin control while limiting collateral damage to nearby normal structures. Cancer excision, whether by Mohs or other techniques, will leave a complex defect that requires careful anatomical and functional reconstruction. This study presents some of the challenges of treating periocular skin cancer and associated reconstructive surgery and provides an intellectual framework for addressing these challenges. The key topics are adherence to anatomical landmarks and aesthetic units, proper distribution of tension, and matching the correct reconstructive approach, that is, type of flap or graft, to the defect at hand. This review is not meant to be exhaustive, but it will provide both basic and advanced considerations.



Urology ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 415-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard F. Wagner ◽  
Willis I. Cottel


2009 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-240
Author(s):  
M. Gutiérrez-Pascual ◽  
E. Gómez-de la Fuente ◽  
F.J. Vicente-Martín ◽  
F. Pinedo-Moraleda


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document