The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What Is the Best Surgical Margin for a Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current management of basal cell carcinoma is surgical excision. Most resections use predetermined surgical margins. The basis of ideal resection margins is almost completely from retrospective data and mainly from small case series. This article presents a systematic analysis from a large pool of data to provide a better basis of determining ideal surgical margin. METHODS: A systematic analysis was performed on data from 89 articles from a larger group of 973 articles selected from the PubMed database. Relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to all articles reviewed and the data were entered into a database for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The total number of lesions analyzed was 16,066; size ranged from 3 to 30 mm (mean, 11.7 ± 5.9 mm). Surgical margins ranged from 1 to 10 mm (mean, 3.9 ± 1.4 mm). Negative surgical margins ranged 45 to 100 percent (mean, 86 ± 12 percent). Recurrence rates for 5-, 4-, 3-, and 2-mm surgical margins were 0.39, 1.62, 2.56, and 3.96 percent, respectively. Pooled data for incompletely excised margins have an average recurrence rate of 27 percent. CONCLUSIONS: A 3-mm surgical margin can be safely used for nonmorpheaform basal cell carcinoma to attain 95 percent cure rates for lesions 2 cm or smaller. A positive pathologic margin has an average recurrence rate of 27 percent.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Guidelines for the management of basal cell carcinoma
Telfer, N. R., Colver, G. B., & Morton, C. A. (2008) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2008.08666.x · Cited by 960
Kimyai-Asadi, A., Goldberg, L. H., & Jih, M. H. (2005) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2005.02.049 · Cited by 100
Cited by
Guidelines of care for the management of basal cell carcinoma
Bichakjian, C., Armstrong, A., Baum, C., Bordeaux, J. S., Brown, M., Busam, K. J., Eisen, D. B., Iyengar, V., Lober, C., Margolis, D. J., et al. (2018) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.10.006 · Cited by 499
Peris, K., Fargnoli, M. C., Kaufmann, R., Arenberger, P., Bastholt, L., Seguin, N. B., Bataille, V., Brochez, L., del Marmol, V., Dummer, R., et al. (2023) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113254 · Cited by 308
Metadata
- Authors
- Gulleth, Y., Goldberg, N., Silverman, R. P., & Gastman, B. R.
- Venue
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1222-1231
- ISSN
- 0032-1052 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2023123308
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 1.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Is the Best Surgical Margin for a Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/prs.0b013e3181ea450d
- The paper
- Gulleth, Y., Goldberg, N., Silverman, R. P., & Gastman, B. R. (2010). What Is the Best Surgical Margin for a Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of the Literature. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0b013e3181ea450d
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.