Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27785781›Full record

ReviewLasers in surgery and medicine2017

Reflectance confocal microscopy of skin in vivo: From bench to bedside.

Milind Rajadhyaksha, Ashfaq Marghoob, Anthony Rossi, Allan C Halpern, Kishwer S Nehal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lasers in surgery and medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

95 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Reflectance confocal microscopy for diagnosing cutaneous melanoma in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Dermoscopy and the Early Melanoma Concept.International journal of dermatology · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Milind RajadhyakshaDermatology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Ashfaq MarghoobDermatology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Anthony RossiDermatology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Allan C HalpernDermatology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Kishwer S NehalDermatology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following more than two decades of effort, reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) imaging of skin was granted codes for reimbursement by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dermatologists in the USA have started billing and receiving reimbursement for the imaging procedure and for the reading and interpretation of images. RCM imaging combined with dermoscopic examination is guiding the triage of lesions into those that appear benign, which are being spared from biopsy, against those that appear suspicious, which are then biopsied. Thus far, a few thousand patients have been spared from biopsy of benign lesions. The journey of RCM imaging from bench to bedside is certainly a success story, but still much more work lies ahead toward wider dissemination, acceptance, and adoption. We present a brief review of RCM imaging and highlight key challenges and opportunities. The success of RCM imaging paves the way for other emerging optical technologies, as well-and our bet for the future is on multimodal approaches. Lasers Surg. Med. 49:7-19, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAdultAgedBiopsy, NeedleDermoscopyFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryMaleMedicaidMedicareMicroscopy, ConfocalMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareSkin NeoplasmsUnited Statesmelanomanon-melanomareflectance confocal microscopyreimbursement codesskinskin cancer

Identifiers

PMID27785781
PMCPMC5575825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.