Oftalmologia (Bucharest, Romania : 1990) · 2002
[Complications of palpebral epitheliomas: diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic implications].
Клинический случайАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nicoară Simona, Mera Mihaela, Gheban D, Olaru Lilia
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To illustrate two cases of palpebral tumors that determined local complications, with consequences on the preoperative diagnosis and the surgical treatment (case 1) and on the functional prognosis of the eye (case 2).
METHOD: The history and evolution of the cases, the surgical techniques, the histopathological reports and the anatomical and functional results are described and analyzed.
RESULTS: In case 1, the extension of the tumor led to a considerable tissular defect that claimed for a long and hard surgery for the anatomical and functional repair of the region. In case 2, the vegetant evolution of the tumor determined the irritation of the cornea and consecutive corneal ulcer that perforated, with the functional loss of the eye.
CONCLUSIONS: The two cases are revealing aspects that are less frequent in the ophthalmic practice. They signalize, besides the deffisient adresability of the patient, the problem of the "territorial dispute" over the palpebral surgery between different specialties.
METHOD: The history and evolution of the cases, the surgical techniques, the histopathological reports and the anatomical and functional results are described and analyzed.
RESULTS: In case 1, the extension of the tumor led to a considerable tissular defect that claimed for a long and hard surgery for the anatomical and functional repair of the region. In case 2, the vegetant evolution of the tumor determined the irritation of the cornea and consecutive corneal ulcer that perforated, with the functional loss of the eye.
CONCLUSIONS: The two cases are revealing aspects that are less frequent in the ophthalmic practice. They signalize, besides the deffisient adresability of the patient, the problem of the "territorial dispute" over the palpebral surgery between different specialties.