Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Resource Use and Cost Comparison of Mohs Micrographic Surgery vs Traditional Surgery for High-risk Facial Basal Cell Carcinoma.

Created on 09 Jul 2026

Authors

Julia Fougelberg, Lovisa Klein, Emelie Pauli, Ann-Marie Wennberg Larkö, Hannah Ceder

Published in

Acta dermato-venereologica. Volume 106. Jul 09, 2026. Epub Jul 09, 2026.

Abstract

High-risk facial basal cell carcinomas are preferably treated with Mohs micrographic surgery, but despite its documented benefits, it remains underused in Sweden. The aim of this study was to evaluate healthcare resource utilization and direct costs for patients with high-risk facial basal cell carci nomas treated with Mohs micrographic surgery compared with traditional surgical excision. In this retrospective registry study, all patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery or surgical excision at Sahlgrenska University Hospital between 2020 and 2024 were included, supplemented by regional healthcare data from the Vega registry, to assess long-term healthcare use up to 10 years after primary treatment. Mohs micrographic surgery was associated with higher initial costs than surgical excision but a slower accumulation of costs over time. Patients initially treated with surgical excision who later required Mohs micrographic surgery incurred the highest total costs, often after multiple prior procedures. These findings indicate that although Mohs micrographic surgery is costlier initially, early access prevents the substantial downstream costs associated with treatment failure. Primary Mohs micrographic surgery is a cost-efficient strategy for high-risk facial basal cell carcinomas and should be used more frequently in order to enable better utilization of resources and improved outcomes for the patient.

PMID:
42423359
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 09 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 6
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement