This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Michael Piepkorn, MD
Dermatology Division University of Washington Box 356524 Seattle, WA 98195-652

Arch Dermatol. 1997;133(1):104-105.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Weinstock takes exception to the conclusion advanced by Barnhill and myself that the choice of a resection margin greater than 1 cm for primary melanomas of any thickness has no factual basis. He bases his objection principally on the data of the randomized, prospective World Health Organization study^1,2 of wide (3-cm) vs narrow (1-cm) resection margins, wherein the application of a 1-cm margin for melanomas of 1 mm to 2 mm in thickness was associated with 4 cases of local recurrence (Table).

On statistical analysis, these instances, as compared with no local recurrences in the subset of patients with 3-cm resection margins, approached the threshold of significance, but there was notably no corresponding trend to a difference in survival outcomes between the 2 arms of the study. To Weinstock, however, these data are nevertheless suggestive that the wider margin offers a protective effect against the hazard of local recurrence. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?