ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2025
Geometric-Marking Quantification for First-Stage Excision of Large Congenital Melanocytic Nevi.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Staged excision is often needed for large CMN. Accurately determining the first-stage excision volume is critical. Objective: To introduce and evaluate a geometric-marking quantification method for precise preoperative planning of the first-stage excision volume in staged CMN removal. Methods: A prospective study was conducted on 21 patients undergoing staged excision of large CMN between January and June 2023. Preoperatively, a novel geometric-marking quantification technique was employed to calculate the maximum feasible first-stage excision volume. Surgical execution, intraoperative conditions, and postoperative recovery were observed. Relevant surgical techniques and postoperative care were examined. Results: All first-stage excisions resulted in successful tension-free primary closure. No instances of insufficient excision, suture dehiscence, or other immediate complications occurred. Postoperative recovery was favorable across all patients. All patients proceeded to successful second-stage excision for complete nevus removal. Conclusion: The geometric-marking quantification method provides a reliable, reproducible, and objective approach for planning the first-stage excision in large CMN. It achieved 100% technical success in this cohort, eliminating complications related to inaccurate volume estimation. This standardized protocol warrants clinical adoption to replace subjective estimation methods, significantly enhancing surgical outcomes and reducing complication risks.
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.