Physicians concerned with the treatment of cutaneous carcinomas have available a selection of modalities that include excision, electrosurgery, chemosurgery, curettage, laser surgery, ionizing radiation, and cryosurgery. Cryosurgery, in particular, has been established over the past 25 years as the treatment of choice for many cutaneous lesions because of its high cure rates and good cosmetic results. Based upon more than two decades of statistical evidence drawn from patients at the Wilson Dermatology Clinic in Wilson, North Carolina, cryosurgery has been demonstrated to be a safe, costefficient, and time-efficient method of treatment yielding positive cosmetic results and overall cure rates of 97%. Although the statistical outcome of more than 20 years of data at the Wilson Dermatology Clinic is compelling, an even more persuasive case for cryosurgery as an effective modality is made when cure rates are examined over a similar period of time in a different region of the country. The data contained in this clinic reflect the curative outcomes of the cryosurgical treatment of 3,324 new and recurrent tumors by Graham at the Wilson Dermatology Clinic as compared with the cure rates reported by Zacarian in the treatment of 5,943 tumors in his Springfield, Massachusetts practice.1 In both practices, the data were accumulated over a time frame of more than 20 years. In 1985, a comparative analysis of cure rates by Graham and Zacarian2 reported similar cryosurgical cure rates varying from 96-98%. The similarity of results, even with significant differences in cryosurgical techniques, continues at this date. This clinic will examine this curative data utilizing four factors of analysis: 1) date of treatment; 2) site of tumor; 3) size of tumor; and 4) method of treatment. Because most of the data contained in this clinic is based upon the work of Graham, greater attention will be paid to the background, techniques, and outcomes of the Wilson Dermatology Clinic. Wherever possible, the cure rates of Zacarian will be offered for comparative analysis and review. © 1990.
