BACKGROUND: Controversy exists over surgical intervention for nonmelanoma skin cancer in the very elderly. OBJECTIVE: We sought to define variables that are prognostic for survival in the elderly after surgery for skin cancer. METHODS: We reviewed 99 charts of nonagenarians who had Mohs micrographic surgery for nonmelanoma skin cancer and recorded data on comorbid conditions and date of death. Comorbid conditions were quantified by the Charlson index. RESULTS: Patients with Charlson scores of zero (no comorbidities) had a statistically significant longer survival than patients with Charlson scores of >/=3 (multiple comorbidities). Women survived longer than men at both 1 and 5 years. No patient died within 30 days of operation. CONCLUSION: Charlson scores of >/=3 in nonagenarians predict shorter survival. Although this parameter may predict shorter survival when skin cancer surgery is considered in a cohort of elderly patients, it remains difficult to predict accurately the survival of individual patients with scores >/=3.
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists over surgical intervention for nonmelanoma skin cancer in the very elderly. OBJECTIVE: We sought to define variables that are prognostic for survival in the elderly after surgery for skin cancer. METHODS: We reviewed 99 charts of nonagenarians who had Mohs micrographic surgery for nonmelanoma skin cancer and recorded data on comorbid conditions and date of death. Comorbid conditions were quantified by the Charlson index. RESULTS:Patients with Charlson scores of zero (no comorbidities) had a statistically significant longer survival than patients with Charlson scores of >/=3 (multiple comorbidities). Women survived longer than men at both 1 and 5 years. No patient died within 30 days of operation. CONCLUSION: Charlson scores of >/=3 in nonagenarians predict shorter survival. Although this parameter may predict shorter survival when skin cancer surgery is considered in a cohort of elderly patients, it remains difficult to predict accurately the survival of individual patients with scores >/=3.
Authors: Karen L Connolly; Jiyeon M Jeong; Christopher A Barker; Marisol Hernandez; Erica H Lee Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Niki B Vora; Karen L Connolly; Stephen Dusza; Anthony M Rossi; Kishwer S Nehal; Erica H Lee Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2020-04-19 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Amanda Maisel-Campbell; Katherine A Lin; Sarah A Ibrahim; Bianca Y Kang; Noor Anvery; McKenzie A Dirr; Rachel E Christensen; Juliet L Aylward; Omar Bari; Hamza Bhatti; Diana Bolotin; Basil S Cherpelis; Joel L Cohen; Sean Condon; Sheila Farhang; Bahar Firoz; Algin B Garrett; Roy G Geronemus; Nicholas J Golda; Tatyana R Humphreys; Eva A Hurst; Oren H Jacobson; S Brian Jiang; Pritesh S Karia; Arash Kimyai-Asadi; David J Kouba; James G Lahti; Martha Laurin Council; Marilyn Le; Deborah F MacFarlane; Ian A Maher; Stanley J Miller; Eduardo K Moioli; Meghan Morrow; Julia Neckman; Timothy Pearson; Samuel R Peterson; Christine Poblete-Lopez; Chad L Prather; Jennifer S Ranario; Ashley G Rubin; Chrysalyne D Schmults; Andrew M Swanson; Christopher Urban; Y Gloria Xu; Murad Alam; Simon Yoo; Emily Poon; Vishnu Harikumar; Alexandra Weil; Sanjana Iyengar; Matthew R Schaeffer Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Emma M Rogers; Karen L Connolly; Kishwer S Nehal; Stephen W Dusza; Anthony M Rossi; Erica Lee Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2017-12-27 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Marjolijn S Haisma; Linda Bras; Mehran Alizadeh Aghdam; Jorrit B Terra; Boudewijn E C Plaat; Emöke Rácz; Gyorgy B Halmos Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 3.875
Authors: Erica H Lee; Rajiv I Nijhawan; Kishwer S Nehal; Stephen W Dusza; Amanda Levine; Amanda Hill; Christopher A Barker Journal: J Skin Cancer Date: 2015-06-09
Authors: A J G Leus; M Frie; M S Haisma; J B Terra; B E C Plaat; R J H M Steenbakkers; G B Halmos; E Rácz Journal: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Date: 2020-03-30 Impact factor: 6.166