Binary dermoscopic classification inadequately stratifies urgent and convenience excision decisions in community dermatology practice.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 DERMATOLOGY
Calogero Pagliarello, Davide Geat, Carlo Renè Girardelli
{"title":"Binary dermoscopic classification inadequately stratifies urgent and convenience excision decisions in community dermatology practice.","authors":"Calogero Pagliarello, Davide Geat, Carlo Renè Girardelli","doi":"10.1684/ejd.2026.5167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dermoscopy is traditionally framed as a binary benign-malignant tool. Yet real-world practice uses multi-level triage: dermatologists allocate lesions to urgent excision, non-urgent excision, or surveillance based on dermoscopic atypia, contextual factors, and surveillance feasibility. Convenience excisions -low-suspicion lesions removed when monitoring is impractical - are a common, unacknowledged pattern. Dermoscopic literature reports only binary outcomes, ignoring this process. To evaluate whether clinical urgency classification captures melanoma risk beyond isolated dermoscopic assessment in community practice with limited surveillance capacity. We retrospectively analysed 371 consecutively excised melanocytic lesions. Two blinded dermatologists independently assigned four-level gestalt atypia scores. Referring dermatologists prospectively classified excisions as urgent or non-urgent, integrating morphological concern with surveillance constraints. Histopathology identified melanoma prevalence and number needed to excise (NNE). Multivariable regression evaluated predictors of melanoma. Melanoma prevalence was 23.2% (86 melanomas: 41 in situ, 45 invasive; NNE=4.3). Inter-rater agreement for morphology-only assessment was poor (κ=0.16), with weak histopathological correlation (ρ=0.23-0.29). Most excisions (75%) were non-urgent, predominantly convenience excisions, yet captured 44 of 86 melanomas (51%). For invasive melanoma alone, NNE rose to 8.2, still favourable versus the 1:10 benchmark. Age predicted melanoma-in situ diagnoses, but age-stratified analysis showed no disproportionate overdiagnosis. Clinical urgency -which integrates morphological concern with contextual factors and shares information with dermoscopic assessment- predicted melanoma (OR=3.05, p=0.002) beyond gestalt scores, age, and phenotypic complexity. Binary dermoscopic frameworks inadequately reflect real-world multi-factorial triage. Effective melanoma detection depends on integrating morphology with patient-specific risk and system-level factors beyond dermoscopy alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":11968,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dermatology","volume":"36 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1684/ejd.2026.5167","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dermoscopy is traditionally framed as a binary benign-malignant tool. Yet real-world practice uses multi-level triage: dermatologists allocate lesions to urgent excision, non-urgent excision, or surveillance based on dermoscopic atypia, contextual factors, and surveillance feasibility. Convenience excisions -low-suspicion lesions removed when monitoring is impractical - are a common, unacknowledged pattern. Dermoscopic literature reports only binary outcomes, ignoring this process. To evaluate whether clinical urgency classification captures melanoma risk beyond isolated dermoscopic assessment in community practice with limited surveillance capacity. We retrospectively analysed 371 consecutively excised melanocytic lesions. Two blinded dermatologists independently assigned four-level gestalt atypia scores. Referring dermatologists prospectively classified excisions as urgent or non-urgent, integrating morphological concern with surveillance constraints. Histopathology identified melanoma prevalence and number needed to excise (NNE). Multivariable regression evaluated predictors of melanoma. Melanoma prevalence was 23.2% (86 melanomas: 41 in situ, 45 invasive; NNE=4.3). Inter-rater agreement for morphology-only assessment was poor (κ=0.16), with weak histopathological correlation (ρ=0.23-0.29). Most excisions (75%) were non-urgent, predominantly convenience excisions, yet captured 44 of 86 melanomas (51%). For invasive melanoma alone, NNE rose to 8.2, still favourable versus the 1:10 benchmark. Age predicted melanoma-in situ diagnoses, but age-stratified analysis showed no disproportionate overdiagnosis. Clinical urgency -which integrates morphological concern with contextual factors and shares information with dermoscopic assessment- predicted melanoma (OR=3.05, p=0.002) beyond gestalt scores, age, and phenotypic complexity. Binary dermoscopic frameworks inadequately reflect real-world multi-factorial triage. Effective melanoma detection depends on integrating morphology with patient-specific risk and system-level factors beyond dermoscopy alone.

在社区皮肤科实践中,二元皮肤镜分类不能充分区分紧急和方便的切除决定。
皮肤镜检查传统上被认为是一种二元良恶性检查工具。然而,现实世界的实践使用多层次的分类:皮肤科医生根据皮肤镜的非典型性、环境因素和监测可行性,将病变分配到紧急切除、非紧急切除或监测。方便切除——在监测不可行的情况下切除低怀疑的病变——是一种常见的、未被承认的模式。皮肤镜文献只报道了二元结果,忽略了这一过程。在监测能力有限的社区实践中,评估临床紧急分类是否能捕捉黑色素瘤风险,而不是孤立的皮肤镜评估。我们回顾性分析了371例连续切除的黑素细胞病变。两位盲法皮肤科医生独立分配了四级格式塔异型评分。参考皮肤科医生前瞻性地将切除分为紧急或非紧急,将形态学关注与监测限制相结合。组织病理学鉴定黑色素瘤患病率和需要切除的数量(NNE)。多变量回归评估黑色素瘤的预测因子。黑色素瘤患病率为23.2%(86个黑色素瘤:原位41个,浸润性45个;NNE=4.3)。形态学评估的评分间一致性较差(κ=0.16),组织病理学相关性较弱(ρ=0.23-0.29)。大多数切除(75%)是非紧急的,主要是方便的切除,但86例黑色素瘤中有44例(51%)被捕获。对于侵袭性黑色素瘤,NNE上升到8.2,与1:10的基准相比仍然有利。年龄预测黑色素瘤原位诊断,但年龄分层分析显示没有不成比例的过度诊断。临床急症——将形态学关注与环境因素结合起来,并与皮肤镜评估共享信息——预测黑色素瘤(OR=3.05, p=0.002)超过格式塔评分、年龄和表型复杂性。二元皮肤镜框架不能充分反映现实世界的多因素分类。有效的黑色素瘤检测依赖于形态学与患者特异性风险和系统水平因素的整合,而不仅仅是皮肤镜检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Dermatology
European Journal of Dermatology 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
129
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Dermatology is an internationally renowned journal for dermatologists and scientists involved in clinical dermatology and skin biology. Original articles on clinical dermatology, skin biology, immunology and cell biology are published, along with review articles, which offer readers a broader view of the available literature. Each issue also has an important correspondence section, which contains brief clinical and investigative reports and letters concerning articles previously published in the EJD. The policy of the EJD is to bring together a large network of specialists from all over the world through a series of editorial offices in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the USA.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书