Related Experiment Videos
Mohs micrographic surgery vs traditional surgical excision: a cost comparison analysis
Tracy L Bialy1, James Whalen, Emir Veledar
1Department of Dermatology, Emory Center for Outcomes Research, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Archives of Dermatology
|June 24, 2004
Summary
Mohs micrographic surgery (Mohs) is cost-comparable to traditional surgical excision (TSE) for facial nonmelanoma skin cancer. Cost-effectiveness depends on margin adequacy and repair type, with Mohs being less costly when facility-based frozen sections are used for TSE.
Area of Science:
- Dermatology
- Surgical Oncology
- Health Economics
Background:
- Nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) is prevalent on the face and ears.
- Mohs micrographic surgery (Mohs) and traditional surgical excision (TSE) are common treatment modalities.
- Understanding the comparative cost and margin adequacy is crucial for optimal patient care and resource allocation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the cost and margin adequacy of Mohs versus TSE for facial and auricular NMSC.
- To evaluate the financial implications of different surgical approaches and margin control strategies.
Main Methods:
- Prospective cost analysis.
- Each patient served as their own control.
- 98 consecutive patients with facial/auricular NMSC were included.
Main Results:
- Mohs and TSE demonstrated comparable costs when Mohs was used for subsequent margin control or when subsequent TSE was performed.
- Mohs was significantly less costly than TSE when facility-based frozen sections were utilized for TSE (956 vs. 1399 USD).
- The cost difference was influenced by the chosen repair method.
Conclusions:
- Mohs surgery is cost-comparable to TSE for achieving clear margins in facial NMSC treatment.
- The choice of surgical repair significantly impacts overall treatment costs.
- Careful consideration of repair methods is essential when evaluating NMSC treatment costs.