You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letters
Periocular basal cell carcinoma pathological reporting
  1. Michelle T Sun1,
  2. Albert Wu1,
  3. Shyamala C Huilgol2,
  4. Dinesh Selva1
  1. 1 South Australian Institute of Ophthalmology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  2. 2 Department of Dermatology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Michelle T Sun, South Australian Institute of Ophthalmology, University of Adelaide, Level 8, East Wing, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia; michelle.sun0703{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304227

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common cancer worldwide, and 85% of all BCCs occur in the head and neck. In the periocular region, recurrent BCC is associated with significant morbidity and, therefore, the ability to identify high-risk tumours is particularly important.1 The Royal College of Pathologists (RCPath) has previously highlighted the key parameters recommended for inclusion in all histopathological reporting to optimise the identification of tumours with aggressive features which may be more likely to recur.2 Recommended parameters included: size (in mm), maximal diameter, histopathological subtype, margins (in mm) both deep and peripheral. For high-risk histological subtypes (infiltrative, micronodular and basosquamous), perineural invasion, lymphovascular invasion and level of invasion are also recommended for inclusion. The histology reporting proforma additionally suggests that negative findings should also …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors SCH and DS contributed to the conception of the design and final approval of version to be published. MTS and AW contributed to the data collection, interpretation of data and manuscript preparation.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.