Access to intraoperative tumour margin control: a survey of the British Oculoplastic Surgery Society.

Abstract

BackgroundPeriocular malignancy is common and in most cases will undergo excision with pre-determined margins and subsequent histological examination. Intraoperative margin control (IOMC) modalities such as fast frozen section (FFS), fast paraffin (FP) and Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) are being increasingly widely used, though there is a lack of information regarding utility. The aim of this study was to survey members of the British Oculoplastic Surgery Society (BOPSS) to determine attitudes and access to different modalities of IOMC.MethodsA 12-question online survey was disseminated via an e-mail to full members of the BOPSS. The survey was hosted using Qualtrics software via the University of Sussex.ResultsThe overall response rate was 64 of 165 (38.8%). MMS was readily available in a neighbouring trust to 23 of 64 respondents (35.9%). Seven respondents (10.9%) reported no regional access to MMS. Twenty-nine members had readily available access to FFS (45.3%) and 37 of 64 to FP (57.8%) in their own institution. There is variation in what tumour types would be considered appropriate for IOMC, though most thought clinically ill-defined (morphoeic) basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) should undergo one form of IOMC (90.6% and 81.3%, respectively).ConclusionThis study highlights variation in availability and utilisation of IOMC amongst oculoplastic surgeons and in different regions of the UK. While the exact place of IOMC in periocular tumour excision is debated, there is a consistent view that it should be available for some tumours. Greater consistency in provision may improve patient outcomes.