Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2012
A histopathologic review of undiagnosed neoplasms in 205 evisceration specimens.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание 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.
Novais Eduardo A, Fernandes Bruno F, Pacheco Luiz F, Di Cesare Sebastian, Miyamoto Cristina, Briccoli Tiago A, Burnier Miguel N
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Evisceration and enucleation are 2 ophthalmic surgeries used to treat blind and painful eyes. The benefits of evisceration over enucleation are many but this procedure is contraindicated in cases of a suspected intra-ocular mass. Given the lack of such studies in the literature, our aim was to review a large sample of eviscerated specimens to document the prevalence of unexpected neoplasms.
METHODS: During the study period (1994-2011), 13,591 human ophthalmic specimens were received at the Henry C. Witelson Ophthalmic Pathology Laboratory and Registry. Of those, 205 were evisceration specimens. Histopathologic reports were reviewed to retrieve relevant clinical information that included clinical diagnosis, age, gender, laterality, and final histopathologic diagnosis.
RESULTS: The total number of unexpected neoplasms was 4 (1.95%) including 2 (0.97%) malignancies: necrotic melanoma (1), ciliary body adenoma (1), iris nevus (1), and spindle cell melanoma (1). All the other remaining eyes had histopathologic findings that were consistent with the underlying diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: With proper pre-operative evaluation, including history, ophthalmologic examination, and imaging studies, the rate of unexpected neoplasms in evisceration specimens were low. Evisceration is a simpler and cheaper procedure when compared with enucleation, and our results corroborate its safety, whenever indicated to treat blind and/or painful eyes.
METHODS: During the study period (1994-2011), 13,591 human ophthalmic specimens were received at the Henry C. Witelson Ophthalmic Pathology Laboratory and Registry. Of those, 205 were evisceration specimens. Histopathologic reports were reviewed to retrieve relevant clinical information that included clinical diagnosis, age, gender, laterality, and final histopathologic diagnosis.
RESULTS: The total number of unexpected neoplasms was 4 (1.95%) including 2 (0.97%) malignancies: necrotic melanoma (1), ciliary body adenoma (1), iris nevus (1), and spindle cell melanoma (1). All the other remaining eyes had histopathologic findings that were consistent with the underlying diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: With proper pre-operative evaluation, including history, ophthalmologic examination, and imaging studies, the rate of unexpected neoplasms in evisceration specimens were low. Evisceration is a simpler and cheaper procedure when compared with enucleation, and our results corroborate its safety, whenever indicated to treat blind and/or painful eyes.