Abstract
The objective of this study was to quantitatively compare outcomes between standard excision (SE) and Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) for basal cell carcinoma (BCC). A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines and a search of electronic databases was conducted to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the outcomes of SE versus MMS for BCC. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate for primary and recurrent BCC. The secondary outcomes included the cost of treatment, aesthetic results, the rate of incomplete excision, and the surgical defect size post excision. Five studies enrolling 2060 lesions were identified. There was a statistically significant difference between MMS and SE groups in terms of recurrence rate for primary BCCs (odds ratio (OR) = 0.44, confidence interval (CI) = 0.16 to 0.97, P = 0.04) and recurrent BCCs (OR = 0.33, CI = 0.12 to 0.97, P = 0.04). For secondary outcomes, MMS had improved results compared with SE, except for mean cost. In conclusion, both primary and secondary BCCs treated with MMS have a reduced recurrence rate and defect size thus simplifying reconstruction. However, due to higher costs and operative time attributed to MMS, it should be reserved for high-risk BCCs.