Evidence Hub

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

Y. Elshot, D. C. K. S. Tio, A. S. E. van Haersma-de With, W. Ouwerkerk, B. Zupan-Kajcovski, M. Crijns, C. E. J. M. Limpens, W. M. Klop et al.

Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 2023

2,909 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

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…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,909 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free