Dermatology: Practical and Conceptual


Dermatology Practical & Conceptual

Introduction

The desire to look more attractive has always been an unde-

niable demand in every society. With the effect of social media 

and the continuous use of filtered selfies, the longing for 

perfection has reached its climax. 

Nowadays, increasingly more patients apply to derma-

tology clinics to eliminate skin imperfections, including nevi. 

We recommend removal of skin lesions performed in the 

classical and safe approach, and to perform histopatholog-

ical examination on removed tissue.  Conventional elliptic 

surgical removal may however heal with linear scarring, 

which is sometimes perceived as unsatisfactory by patients.  

In recent years, alternative methods such as ablative lasers 

have been introduced as a treatment option to destroy nevus 

cells near the skin surface to optimize cosmetic outcome with 

reduced scarring risk. Although laser removal is a feasible and 

charming option, the technique’s crucial pitfalls should not be 

disregarded. The main risk in destroying a nevus with ablative 

methods is the possibility of removing a melanoma. While 

early recognition and complete excision of melanoma is cura-

tive, advanced stages are associated with a high mortality rate, 

despite the progress in treatment modalities. Misinterpreta-

tion of melanoma for a nevus may lead to delayed diagnosis 

of an advanced/metastatic melanoma. Another potential risk 

of nevi laser removal is the malignant transformation of the 

remaining nevus cells into a melanoma. Unfortunately, these 

theoretical scenarios exist more often than we may think and 

have tragic consequences.

Case 1

An 18-year-old female patient was referred to an experienced 

dermatologist because of an enlarged mass on the neck. The 

lesion had a history of 10 years. 2 years ago, ablative laser was 

performed for cosmetic reasons. The lesion enlarged in several 

months. This time the lesion was identified as a hypertrophic 

scar by the physician. He applied intralesional steroid therapy 

twice. The lesion enlarged continuously (Figure 1, A and B) 

and the patient sought professional medical advice. The lesion 

was excised, and the pathology confirmed nodular melanoma 

Commentary | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2021; 11(4): e2021117 1

Accelerated Use of Non-Surgical Techniques for 
Nevi Removal: Primum Non-Nocere

Seçil Vural1, Bengü Nisa Akay 2, Arda Yaycıoğlu1, Seher Bostancı 2

1 Koç University, School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology and Venereology

2 Ankara University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Dermatology and Venereology

Key words: melanoma, nevus, skin neoplasms, cosmetic dermatology

Citation: Vural S, Akay BN, Yaycıoğlu A, Bostancı S. Accelerated use of non-surgical techniques for nevi removal: primum non-nocere. 
Dermatol Pract Concept. 2021; 11(4): e2021117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5826/dpc.1104a117 

Accepted: March 25, 2021; Published: September 2021

Copyright: ©2021 Vural et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License BY-
NC-4.0, which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and 
source are credited.

Funding: None.

Competing interests: None.

Authorship: All authors have contributed significantly to this publication.

Corresponding Author: Seçil Vural, MD, Associate Professor, Koç University School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology 
and Venereology. Koç Üniversitesi Hastanesi, Davutpaşa Cad, No:4 Topkapı, İstanbul, Turkey. Email: sevural@ku.edu.tr 



2 Commentary | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2021; 11(4): e2021117

Figure 1. Case reports. (A) Case 1: 18-year-old woman diagnosed 

with pathology confirmed nodular melanoma with a Breslow thick-

ness of 7.8 mm 6 months after ablative laser, and intralesional ste-

roid injections. (B) Case 1: Dermoscopy showing a nodular mass 

with central hemorrhagic ulcer, serpentine-branched vessels on a 

pink structureless area, and remnants of brown pigmentation. (C) 

Case 3: Clinical image of a superficial spreading melanoma with 

a Breslow thickness of 0.75mm on the leg of a 33-year-old female. 

The lesion was first treated with chemical peels and reappeared after 

3 months expanding continuously. (D) Case 3: Dermoscopic image 

showing a well demarcated lesion with chaos of border abruptness, 

eccentric gray-black structureless area, and white lines. (E) Case 4: 

Magnetic resonance imaging showing a melanoma metastasis in the 

brain causing severe edema and midline shift. The patient recalled 

non-surgical removal of a pigmented nevus from his leg

with a Breslow thickness of 7.8 mm, Clark level V. Sentinel 

lymph node biopsy showed extra capsular involvement

Case 2

A 30-year-old male patient was referred to our department 

with the diagnosis of metastatic melanoma of unknown 

origin to examine the primary focus. The medical history 

revealed that a general surgeon removed a lesion on his 

neck for cosmetic reasons without sending the specimen 

to histopathological examination. The surgeon claimed the 

lesion as benign. After 2 years, the patient felt the enlarge-

ment of regional lymph nodes on the neck, and histopa-

thology revealed a metastatic melanoma. Positron emission 

tomography showed metastasis in the lungs. After 1 year 

of treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, the patient 

passed away.



Commentary | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2021; 11(4): e2021117 3

Case 3

A 33-year-old woman female requested therapeutic advice 

from a pharmacist for pigmented nevi on her left arm. The 

pharmacist recommended an acidic peeling to remove or 

destroy the pigmented area. After the application, the patient 

had a severe burn affecting the area, and the lesion was par-

tially destroyed. However, after 3 months, the lesion started 

to evolve and expand (Figure 1, C and D).  Histopathological 

analysis confirmed the diagnosis of superficial spreading 

melanoma with a Breslow thickness of 0.75mm and Clark 

level of III.

Case 4

A 41-year-old male dentist had a history of increasing severity 

of headaches, vomiting and blurred vision for the last month. 

Cranial magnetic imaging revealed 3 masses in the brain. 

The most prominent lesion caused severe edema and midline 

shift (Figure 1 E). Positron emission tomography showed 

multiple masses, including masses at the level of the heart 

atrium, pancreas, lung, and subcutaneous tissue of the left leg. 

Histopathology of the mass from the subcutaneous mass in 

the leg was consistent with melanoma metastasis. The patient 

was referred to a dermatologist to examine the skin for the 

primary lesion. He mentioned a previous dermatology visit 

when he complained from a nevus on his leg 3 years ago. At 

the time, the physician removed the nevus with an ablative 

method. The patient is currently using BRAF+MEK inhibi-

tors, and the large mass on the brain is treated with Gamma 

Knife radiosurgery. 

Discussion

The most common method used by non-dermatologist phy-

sicians to evaluate the malignancy potential is the ABCDE 

method (A-asymmetry, B-border, C-color, D-diameter, E-evo-

lution). However, naked-eye assessment of a skin lesion using 

this method is inadequate. Clinical detection of a melanoma 

in early stages can be very challenging, even with dermoscopy. 

The examination of tumoral proliferations on the skin has 

improved significantly with the introduction of various der-

moscopic algorithms [1-3] . Still, an initial melanoma can be 

evaluated as a nevus even by an experienced dermatoscopist 

and detected by digital dermoscopy follow-ups [4]. Besides, 

many clinically similar non-melanocytic lesions exist such 

as dermal nevi and nodular basal cell carcinomas [5]. A 

histopathological evaluation of the nevi is therefore always 

necessary before aesthetic treatment.

The risk of malpractice accusations in dermatology is 

comparatively low. However, malignant neoplasms of the 

skin require special considerations. Between 2006 and 2015 

malignant neoplasms of the skin and melanoma together, 

ranked first in dermatology liability claims and resulted in 

the most extensive recovery in the US, probably reflecting the 

worldwide situation [6, 7]. 

The time lap between the destruction of the primary 

lesion and subsequent recurrence of a melanoma ranges 

between 2-10 years. This makes the accurate interpretation 

of the harm caused by this new wave, tricky [8]. The belief 

that one can easily differentiate a benign nevus from a malig-

nant one possesses a significant risk with the frequent use 

of ablative modalities to treat skin lesions. We recommend 

professional organizations to determine a new policy that 

incorporates skin cancer education and use of dermoscopy 

in certifying treating physicians. Besides, a strict filing of the 

procedures and long-term follow-ups are needed to obtain 

the data allowing to measure the accuracy and safety of 

these techniques. Even with proper education and policies, 

a histopathologic evaluation of the lesion is crucial prior to 

conducting an aesthetic removal. We are extremely concerned 

by the widespread use of ablative techniques to remove skin 

lesions, as this may increase late melanomas. As physicians, 

our first rule when approaching a patient should always be 

as stated in the famous Latin phrase: ‘’first, do no harm’’. 

Informed Consent: The patients in this manuscript or their 

first-degree relatives provided written informed consent for 

the publication of their case details.

References

1. Argenziano G, Soyer HP, Chimenti S, Talamini R, Corona R, 

Sera F, et al. Dermoscopy of pigmented skin lesions: results of 

a consensus meeting via the Internet. J Am Acad Dermatol. 

2003;48(5):679-93.DOI: 10.1067/mjd.2003.281.

2. Carrera C, Marchetti MA, Dusza SW, Argenziano G, Braun 

RP, Halpern AC, et al. Validity and Reliability of Dermoscopic 

Criteria Used to Differentiate Nevi From Melanoma: A Web-

Based International Dermoscopy Society Study. JAMA Dermatol. 

2016;152(7):798-806. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.0624.

3. Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M. Diagnostic ac-

curacy of dermoscopy. Lancet Oncol. 2002;3(3):159-65. DOI: 

10.1016/S1470-2045(02)00679-4.

4. Menzies SW, Emery J, Staples M, Davies S, McAvoy B, Fletcher 

J, et al. Impact of dermoscopy and short-term sequential digital 

dermoscopy imaging for the management of pigmented lesions 

in primary care: a sequential intervention trial. Br J Dermatol. 

2009;161(6):1270-7.DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09374.x.

5. Hoogedoorn L, Peppelman M, Blokx WAM, van Erp PEJ, Ger-

ritsen MP. Prospective differentiation of clinically difficult to 

distinguish nodular basal cell carcinomas and intradermal nevi 

by non-invasive Reflectance Confocal Microscopy: a case series 

study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2015;29(2):330-6.DOI: 

10.1111/jdv.12548.

6. Kornmehl H, Singh S, Adler BL, Wolf AE, Bochner DA, Arm-

strong AW. Characteristics of Medical Liability Claims Against 

Dermatologists From 1991 Through 2015. JAMA Dermatol. 

2018;154(2):160-6.DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.3713.



4 Commentary | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2021; 11(4): e2021117

7. Arimany Manso J, Martin Fumadó C, Mascaró Ballester JM. 

Medical Malpractice Issues in Dermatology: Clinical Safety and 

the Dermatologist. Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas (English Edition). 

2019;110(1):20-7.DOI: 10.1016/j.adengl.2018.11.007.

8. Crowson AN. Medicolegal aspects of neoplastic dermatology. 

Mod Pathol. 2006;19 Suppl 2:S148-54. DOI: 10.1038/mod-

pathol.3800518.