Multidisciplinary long‐term care and modern surgical treatment of congenital melanocytic nevi – recommendations by the CMN surgery network. (27th September 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ott, Hagen; Krengel, Sven; Beck, Otfrid; Böhler, Kornelia; Böttcher‐Haberzeth, Sophie; Cangir, Özlem; Fattouh, Miriam; Häberle, Beate; Hüging, Martina; Königs, Ingo; Kosch, Ferdinand; Rok, Kralj; Marathovouniotis, Nicos; Meyer, Lutz; Neuhaus, Kathrin; Rothe, Karin; Schiestl, Clemens; Sinnig, Mechthild; Theiler, Martin; von der Heydt, Susanne; Wälchli, Regula; Weibel, Lisa; Wendenburg, Wera; Breuninger, Helmut
• Is Part Of: Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. Volume 17:Number 10(2019)
• Page Start: 1005
• Page End: 1016
• Publication Date: 2019-09-27
• Subjects: Skin -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Dermatology -- Periodicals; 616.5005
• DOI: 10.1111/ddg.13951
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1610-0379

Abstract

Summary: In recent years, our knowledge of congenital melanocytic nevi (CMN) has greatly expanded. This has led to a paradigm shift. The present article represents a commentary by an interdisciplinary group of physicians from German‐speaking countries with extensive experience in long‐term care and surgical treatment of children and adults with CMN (CMN surgery network, "Netzwerk Nävuschirurgie", NNC). The authors address aspects such as the indication for treatment as well as treatment planning and implementation under these new premises. Adequate counseling of parents on conservative and/or surgical management requires an interdisciplinary exchange among physicians and individualized planning of the intervention, which frequently involves a multi‐stage procedure. Today, the long‐term aesthetic outcome is at the center of any therapeutic endeavor, whereas melanoma prevention plays only a minor role. The premise of "removal at any cost" no longer holds. Potential treatment‐related adverse effects (hospitalization, wound healing disorders, and others) must be carefully weighed against the prospects of a beneficial outcome. In this context, the use of dermabrasion in particular must be critically evaluated. At a meeting of the NNC in September 2018, its members agreed on a consensus‐based position on dermabrasion, stating that the procedure frequently leads to impaired wound healing and cosmetically unfavorable or hypertrophic scarring. Moreover, dermabrasion is considered to be commonly associated with considerable repigmentation that usually occurs a number of years after the procedure. In addition, the NNC members saw no benefit in terms of melanoma prevention. In the future, physicians should therefore thoroughly caution about the potential risks and often limited cosmetic benefits of dermabrasion.