ReviewWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2018
Histopathologic pitfalls of Mohs micrographic surgery and a review of tumor histology.
Review in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visualizing the molecular landscape of skin: applications and perspectives of mass spectrometry imaging.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Review
- [Use of modern imaging in dermatosurgery].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Unraveling the Mysteries of Perineural Invasion in Benign and Malignant Conditions.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Multimodal Strategy in Localized Merkel Cell Carcinoma: Where Are We and Where Are We Heading?International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Muffin Technique Micrographic Surgery for Non-melanoma Skin Cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- Distinguishing malignant from benign microscopic skin lesions using desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry imaging.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Article
- Outcome of staged excision with pathologic margin control in high-risk basal cell carcinoma of the head region.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mohs micrographic surgery is a specialized subset of staged surgical excisions with each subsequent stage being driven largely by the histologic findings of the previous stage. Therefore, it is imperative that histologic analysis is performed in an accurate manner. Frozen section and tissue flattening is a crucial step in Mohs surgery. Frozen sections introduce certain artifacts and these artifacts must be interpreted in the correct context. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common tumors encountered in Mohs micrographic surgery, and their histopathology is also associated with certain "pitfalls". Basal cell carcinoma should be distinguished from hair follicles, folliculocentric basaloid proliferations, poromas, nevus sebaceous, desmoplastic trichoepitheliomas, and spiradenomas, to name but a few histologic entities. Similarly, squamous cell carcinoma should be distinguished from hypertrophic actinic keratoses, pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia, sebaceous carcinoma, and microcystic adnexal carcinoma. In addition, there are numerous subtypes of basal cell and squamous carcinomas that the Mohs surgeon should be aware of due to differences in the biologic behavior of these tumors. This review presents a number of the common histologic pitfalls of Mohs micrographic surgery and a review of tumor histology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.