Should Margin Status of Biopsies Be Included in Dermatopathology Reports? Clinician Preferences and the Importance of Unambiguous Language

Abstract

Significant communication occurs between pathologists and clinicians through the dermatopathology report. Our objective was to describe clinician preference about reporting of the margin status of skin biopsies of nonmelanoma skin cancers. An anonymous survey was sent to 243 medical providers who submitted specimens to a single institution university medical center; 50 complete responses from attending-level providers and advance practice providers were received. The majority (96%) of those surveyed indicated margins should be reported on skin biopsies of neoplasms, particularly nonmelanoma skin cancers (basal cell carcinoma 96% and squamous cell carcinoma 92%) and atypical nevi (96%). When asked about particular language used to describe the margin status, some phrasing led to more variance in respondents' clinical management decisions, with 96%–98% of respondents making the same decision when presented with “unambiguous” terms and 58%–84% of respondents making the same decision when presented with “ambiguous” language (P < 0.001). Respondents generally preferred “unambiguous” margin descriptions when shown an involved margin (70% vs. 30%, P < 0.001) but accepted “ambiguous” language when the margin was clearly uninvolved (68% vs. 32%, P = 0.015). Most respondents (88%) desire inclusion of treatment recommendations in dermatopathology reports. Microscopic descriptions were highly utilized, particularly by nondermatology trained clinicians (97% vs. 80%, P = 0.09). Clinicians desire inclusion of margins for skin biopsies in dermatopathology reports, at least in some circumstances. The choice of language used to describe the margin status in dermatopathology reports has important implications for patient care. Margin descriptors that are unclear or ambiguous may lead to more variance in clinical management.