Results of the surgical treatment of primary skin melanoma depending on the method of tumor excision and options for closing the surgical defect

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

The aim of the study was to analyze the results of the surgical treatment of patients with primary skin melanoma (SM) according to the location of the primary tumor, the type of incision, and the method of suturing the postoperative defect.

Material and methods. Patients with primary SM, treated in 2013 (n = 337) were studied; these patients were randomized into two groups using the method of blind selection to the main (n = 182) comparisons (n = 155) (after removal of the tumor, simple linear wound closure was performed).

Results. In patients with localized forms of SM, it was found necessary to perform a round incision when the tumor is localized on the trunk and an elliptical incision when localized on the extremities, followed by plastic replacement in all cases. In stage III patients with any tumor localization, the type of incision and suturing of the defect was not of fundamental importance.

Discussion. It was revealed that patients with tumor on the trunk after rounded incision and plastic surgery had an advantage in progression-free survival (PFS) at all stages before an elliptical incision without plastic surgery during the entire observation period (12–36–60 months) by 18.8%–23%, 8%–26.5% (p ˂ 0.050). Patients with localized forms of melanoma from stage 0 to IIc over the entire follow-up period of 12–36–60 months had the greatest benefit in PFS from a round incision with plastic before conventional suturing without plastic surgery: from stage 0 to IIa by 22.0%–31.8%–32.0%, from stage IIb to IIc by 35.6%–28.5%–34.8%. In overall survival (OS), only patients with a rounded incision and plastic surgery in the initial stages of the disease stage 0 to IIa up to 36 and 60 months benefited by 24.4% and 29.3%, respectively. Compared with patients who underwent simple excision on the trunk, patients with stage IIb–IIc with elliptical incisions and plasty had an advantage in PFS in the long term up to 36–60 months of follow-up by 25.7% and in IDS with stages 0-IIa in the period 12–36 months by 24.4%.

With the localization of the primary tumor on the extremities, a statistical difference was revealed with the best indicators in patients with an elliptical incision and plastic surgery in the OS compared to patients with a rounded incision and plastic surgery in the period of 36–60 months by 18.6% and 26.7%, respectively, as well as over patients with a conventional incision without plastic surgery in PFS as a whole in the subgroup at periods up to 36 and 60 months by 26.4% and 29.4% with a tendency to improve this indicator in the long term, as well as better SOS in the long term in these patients with a difference in OS of 19.3% (36–60 months of observation).

Conclusion. In patients with localized stages (0–IIc), with the localization of the primary SM on the trunk, it is necessary to perform a round excision followed by plasty of the defect with displaced tissues; in addition, it is advisable to have an elliptical incision along the axial line for the limbs, followed by plasty of the defect. In patients with stage III, the shape of the incision and the method of suturing do not play a significant role in PFS and OS.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Sergei A. Yargunin

Krasnodar cancer center No.1

Author for correspondence.
Email: sdocer@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5252-7179

MD, PhD, the Head of the Department

Russian Federation, Krasnodar

Ya. N. Shoykhet

Altay State Medical University

Email: sdocer@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5253-4325
Russian Federation, Barnaul

A. F. Lazarev

Altay State Medical University

Email: sdocer@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1080-5294
Russian Federation, Barnaul

References

  1. Agarwala S.S. An update on pegylated IFN-α2b for the adjuvant treatment of melanoma // Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2012. Vol. 12. N 11. P. 1449–1459. doi: 10.1586/era.12.120.
  2. Eggermont A.M., Gore M. Randomized adjuvant therapy trials in melanoma: surgical and systemic // Semin Oncol. 2007. Vol. 34. N 6. P. 509–515.
  3. Zitelli J.A., Brown C.D., Hanusa B.H. Surgical margins for excision of primary cutaneous melanoma // J Am Acad Dermatol. 1997. Vol. 37 (Pt 1). N 3. P. 422–429.
  4. Cohen L.M., McCall M.W., Hodge S.J., Freedman J.D., Callen J.P., Zax R.H. Successful treatment of lentigo maligna and lentigo maligna melanoma with Mohs’ micrographic surgery aided by rush permanent sections // Cancer. 1994. Vol. 73. N 12. P. 2964–2970.
  5. Khayat D., Rixe O., Martin G., Soubrane C., Banzet M., Bazex J.A., et al. French Group of Research on Malignant Melanoma. Surgical margins in cutaneous melanoma (2 cm versus 5 cm for lesions measuring less than 2.1-mm thick) // Cancer. 2003. Vol. 97. N 8. P. 1941–1946.
  6. Cohn-Cedermark G., Rutqvist L.E., Andersson R., Breivald M., Ingvar C., Johansson H., et al. Long term results of a randomized study by the Swedish Melanoma Study Group on 2-cm versus 5-cm resection margins for patients with cutaneous melanoma with a tumor thickness of 0.8-2.0 mm // Cancer. 2000. Vol. 89. N 7. P. 1495–1501.
  7. Veronesi U., Cascinelli N., Adamus J., Balch C., Bandiera D., Barchuk A., et al. Thin stage I primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. Comparison of excision with margins of 1 or 3 cm // N Engl J Med. 1988. Vol. 318. N 18. P. 1159–1162.
  8. Thomas J.M., Newton-Bishop J., A’Hern R., Coombes G., Timmons M., Evans J., et al. United Kingdom Melanoma Study Group. British Association of Plastic Surgeons. Scottish Cancer Therapy Network. Excision margins in high-risk malignant melanoma // N Engl J Med. 2004. Vol. 350. N 8. P. 757–766.
  9. Ringborg U., Brahme E.M., Drewiecki K. Randomized trial of a resection margin of 2 cm versus 4 cm for cutaneous malignant melanoma with a tumor thickness of more than 2 mm // Proceedings of 6th World Congress on Melanoma: 2005 Sep 6–10; Vancouver, British Columbia.
  10. Balch C.M., Soong S.J., Smith T., Ross M.I., Urist M.M., Karakousis C.P., et al. Investigators from the Intergroup Melanoma Surgical Trial. Long-term results of a prospective surgical trial comparing 2 cm vs. 4 cm excision margins for 740 patients with 1-4 mm melanomas // Ann Surg Oncol. 2001. Vol. 8. N 2. P. 101–108.
  11. Balch C.M., Urist M.M., Karakousis C.P., Smith T.J., Temple W.J., Drzewiecki K., et al. Efficacy of 2-cm surgical margins for intermediate-thickness melanomas (1 to 4 mm). Results of a multi-institutional randomized surgical trial // Ann Surg. 1993. Vol. 218. N 3. P. 262–267.
  12. Thomas J.M., Newton-Bishop J., A’Hern R., Coombes G., Timmons M., Evans J., et al. United Kingdom Melanoma Study Group; British Association of Plastic Surgeons; Scottish Cancer Therapy Network. Excision margins in high-risk malignant melanoma // N Engl J Med. 2004. Vol. 350. N 8. P. 757–766.
  13. Ringborg U., Brahme E.M, Drewiecki K. Randomized trial of a resection margin of 2 cm versus 4 cm for cutaneous malignant melanoma with a tumor thickness of more than 2 mm // Proceedings of 6th World Congress on Melanoma: 2005 Sep 6–10; Vancouver, British Columbia.
  14. Heaton K.M., Sussman J.J., Gershenwald J.E., Lee J.E., Reintgen D.S., Mansfield P.F., Ross M.I. Surgical margins and prognostic factors in patients with thick (>4mm) primary melanoma // Ann Surg Oncol. 1998. Vol. 5. N 4. P. 322–328.
  15. Kenady D.E., Brown B.W., McBride C.M. Excision of underlying fascia with a primary malignant melanoma: effect on recurrence and survival rates // Surgery. 1982. Vol. 92. N 4. P. 615–618.
  16. Holmström H. Surgical management of primary melanoma // Semin Surg Oncol. 1992. Vol. 8. N 6. P. 366–369.
  17. Khandelwal C.M., Meyers M.O., Yeh J.J., Amos K.D., Frank J.S., Long P., et al. Relative value unit impact of complex skin closures to academic surgical melanoma practices // American Journal of Surgery. 2012. Vol. 204. N 3. P. 327–31. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.10.014.
  18. Testori A., Rutkowski P., Marsden J., Bastholt L., Chiarion-Sileni V., Hauschild A., et al. Surgery and radiotherapy in the treatment of cutaneous melanoma // Ann Oncol. 2009. Vol. 20. Suppl 6. P. vi22–vi29. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp257.
  19. Przhdeckij YV. Plastic repair of skin defects in cancer patients. Onkokhirurgiya. 2010;(2):17–23. (In Russ).
  20. Aglullin IR, Safin IR. Musculoskeletal plasty of skin and soft tissue defects in the treatment of malignant tumors. Sarkomy kostey, myagkih tkaney i opuholi kozhi. 2009;(1):68–70. (In Russ).
  21. Demidov LV, Utyashev IA, Harkevich GY. The role of vemurafenib in the treatment of disseminated skin melanoma. Sovremennaya onkologiya. 2013;(2):58–61. (In Russ).

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2020 Eco-Vector



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: ПИ № ФС 77 - 86496 от 11.12.2023 г
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: ЭЛ № ФС 77 - 80673 от 23.03.2021 г
.



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies