Non‐invasive imaging techniques in presurgical margin assessment of basal cell carcinoma: Current evidence

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is based on clinical and dermoscopical features. In uncertain cases, innovative imaging techniques, such as reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), have been used. The main limitation of these techniques is the inability to study deep margins. HFUS (high‐frequency ultrasound) and the most recent UHFUS (ultra‐high‐frequency ultrasound) have been used in various applications in dermatology, but they are not yet routinely used in the diagnosis of BCC. A key point in clinical practice is to find an imaging technique that can help to reduce post‐surgical recurrences with a careful presurgical assessment of the lesional margins. This technique should show high sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility and simplicity of execution. This concept is very important for the optimal management of patients who are often elderly and have many comorbidities. The aim of the paper is to analyse the characteristics of current imaging techniques and the studies in the literature on this topic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors independently searched the MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Cochrane Library databases for studies looking for non‐invasive imaging techniques for the presurgical margin assessment of BCC. RESULTS: Preoperative study of the BCC subtype can help to obtain a complete excision with free margins. Different non‐invasive imaging techniques have been studied for in vivo evaluation of tumour margins, comparing the histologic evaluation with a radical surgery. The possibility to study the lateral and deep margins would allow a reduction of recurrences and sparing of healthy tissue. CONCLUSION: HFUS and UHFUS represent the most promising, non‐invasive techniques for the pre‐operative study of BCC facilitating the characterization of vascularization, deep lateral margins and high‐risk subtypes, although they are limited by insufficient literature unlike RCM and OCT.