Better to Freeze a Mole or Remove with a Scalpel?

Moles need to be biopsied if they are removed.  If it is frozen, there is no tissue to send in to be examined under the microscope.  So you will not know if it is not cancerous or precancerous.

So if you are sure it's a mole, I would have it removed with a scalpel.

If you're not sure what the growth is (i.e. it is a new bump, could be a basal cell carcinoma or precancerous actinic keratosis or a benign seborrheic keratosis), I would have a dermatologist take a look and see what they think it is.  The actinic keratosis or seborrheic keratosis can be treated with freezing.  But not a mole or basal cell carcinoma, those would need a scalpel.

Cutting a mole or shaving it have several benefits for the patient:
- you have a specimen the pathologist can examine to give you a definitive diagnosis (IE cancer or benign)
- the tissues heal faster and better when they are not burned or frozen (no white, hypo pigmented round bull's eye scar to explain).

Freezing lesions is done when the patient is covered with lesions which are not overt cancers and the patient is elderly.

You decide.
 

Definitely do not freeze off a mole.  It should be shaved flat if there are no concerning signs for cancer.  If done properly this will not leave a scar.  It could grow back because the "root" of the mole is still in the skin.  If there is any question about the possibility of a cancer, a punch biopsy (core sample)  or excision can be done, but this will live an indentation/scar , which can be quite noticable on the nose.   You can check out my website for how we remove moles.