Achieving Adherence With NCCN Guidelines for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Regarding Peripheral and Deep En Face Margin Assessment (PDEMA)

Peripheral and deep en face margin assessment (PDEMA), formerly termed by NCCN as complete circumferential peripheral and deep margin assessment (CCPDMA), has the advantages of histologic visualization of the entire marginal surface, highly accurate resection of involved tissue, and sparing of uninvolved tissue. Owing to its highest reported cure rates, PDEMA is the NCCN-preferred treatment for dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, high-risk basal cell carcinoma, and very-high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. In the United States, Mohs micrographic surgery (Mohs) is the most common method of PDEMA. In Germany and some other countries, non-Mohs methods of PDEMA referred to as the Tubingen torte and muffin techniques are more widely used. The Tubingen methods of PDEMA require close communication between surgeon and pathologist. This article describes the background of both Mohs and Tubingen PDEMA, reviews what constitutes PDEMA, and provides a protocol for Tubingen PDEMA detailing critical components in a stepwise fashion using illustrative photos and diagrams. We hope to broaden understanding of the NCCN Guidelines and their rationale, align practice, and optimize patient outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2024.7037
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.55
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Achieving Adherence With NCCN Guidelines for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Regarding Peripheral and Deep En Face Margin Assessment (PDEMA)

Kishwer S. Nehal, Roy C. Grekin, Tejesh Patel, Kelly Olino et al.
4 citations
Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
1.55
article

Achieving Adherence With NCCN Guidelines for Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Regarding Peripheral and Deep En Face Margin Assessment (PDEMA)

Kishwer S. Nehal, Roy C. Grekin, Tejesh Patel, Kelly Olino, Chrysalyne D. Schmults, Jeffrey Scott, Jeremy S. Bordeaux, Sumaira Z. Aasi, Ashok R. Shaha, Carlo M. Contreras, Divya Srivastava, Jessica M. Donigan, Dominick J. DiMaio, Murad Alam, Jeffrey M. Farma, Pei-Ling Chen, Paul Nghiem, Yaohui Xu, Lawrence A. Mark, Young Jin Lim
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Peripheral and deep en face margin assessment (PDEMA), formerly termed by NCCN as complete circumferential peripheral and deep margin assessment (CCPDMA), has the advantages of histologic visualization of the entire marginal surface, highly accurate resection of involved tissue, and sparing of uninvolved tissue. Owing to its highest reported cure rates, PDEMA is the NCCN-preferred treatment for dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, high-risk basal cell carcinoma, and very-high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. In the United States, Mohs micrographic surgery (Mohs) is the most common method of PDEMA. In Germany and some other countries, non-Mohs methods of PDEMA referred to as the Tubingen torte and muffin techniques are more widely used. The Tubingen methods of PDEMA require close communication between surgeon and pathologist. This article describes the background of both Mohs and Tubingen PDEMA, reviews what constitutes PDEMA, and provides a protocol for Tubingen PDEMA detailing critical components in a stepwise fashion using illustrative photos and diagrams. We hope to broaden understanding of the NCCN Guidelines and their rationale, align practice, and optimize patient outcomes.

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer NetworkVol. 22(9)
Northwestern University (US), Indiana University Health (US), Fox Chase Cancer Center (US), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US), University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US), University of Washington (US), University of Utah (US), The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (US), Huntsman Cancer Institute (US), Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation (US), Yale Cancer Center (US), Moffitt Cancer Center (US), Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US), Southwestern Medical Center (US), University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center (US), Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center (US), Smilow Cancer Hospital (US), UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Stanford Cancer Institute, Fred and Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University (US), Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US), The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US), Stanford University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
1.55
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.