ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Review of Dermoscopy and Reflectance Confocal Microscopy Features of the Mucosal Melanoma.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Earlier detection of melanoma usingFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Line-Field Confocal Optical Coherence Tomography for the Evaluation of Pigmented Skin Lesions of the Genital Area.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- In Vivo Reflectance Confocal Microscopy Applied to Acral Melanocytic Lesions: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Confocal Assessment of Pigmented-Mucosal Lesions: A Monocentric, Retrospective Evaluation of Lip and Genital Area.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2024Article
- Dermoscopy in the diagnosis of cutaneous lymphoma (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Review
- Treatment outcomes of mucosal melanoma of head and neck: Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced disease.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mucosal melanoma is a rare tumor with aggressive biological behavior and poor prognosis. Diagnosis is often performed at an advanced stage when the lesions become symptomatic. Although dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) are widely used techniques for the diagnosis of cutaneous tumors, their use for mucosal lesions is not well established, probably because the latter are rarer. The objective of this study was to evaluate current literature on these imaging techniques for mucosal melanoma. We searched in PubMed and Cochrane databases all studies up to October 2020 dealing with dermoscopy, RCM, and mucosal melanoma. We found that the most relevant dermoscopic features were structureless pattern and/or the presence of multiple colors. RCM examination mainly showed numerous basal hyper-reflective dendritic cells and loss of normal architecture of the papillae of the lamina propria. Although diagnostic algorithms have been proposed for both techniques, the limit of these methods is the absence of large studies and of standardized and shared diagnostic criteria.
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.