Treatment of giant congenital melanocytic nevi with cultured epithelial autografts: Clinical and histopathological analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Curettage and dermabrasion are effective in the treatment of giant congenital melanocytic nevi (GCMN); however, local infection and hypertrophic scar formation are major issues. Thus, we applied cultured epithelial autografts (CEA) on skin defects after curettage or abrasion of GCMN and assessed the postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Seven nevi lesions of five patients (aged 3 months to 24 years) were treated with CEA after curettage or abrasion with a dermatome or a surgical bar, respectively. We assessed the postoperative outcomes, including CEA take ratio, erosion and/or ulcer formation in the acute phase, hospitalization days, Vancouver scar scale, and color improvement one year after the operation. In addition, a histological evaluation of a skin biopsy was performed over one year after the operation. RESULTS: The CEAs took well on the wound, and the wound surface was mostly epithelized by postoperative day 7 in all cases. While hypertrophic scar formation and slight pigmentation were observed in some lesions, the color was improved in all of the treated lesions. Histopathological examination revealed that the regenerated epidermis had stratified keratinocytes with rete ridges, and the dermal layer without nevus cells regenerated above the remaining dermis layer. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that early epithelialization and regeneration of the dermal layer was achieved after the application of CEA, suggesting that CEA could be an effective option after curettage or abrasion of GCMN.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".