Orbital Imaging for Orbital Decompression

2020 ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
Milind N. Naik
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 37-45
Author(s):  
R.P. Roncevic ◽  
◽  
Z. Savkovic ◽  
R.T. Nigmatullin ◽  
◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Guo ◽  
Xiaofeng Li ◽  
Ruiqi Ma ◽  
Jiang Qian

Abstract Background Postoperative ocular imbalance is an important problem for orbital decompression surgery in thyroid eye disease (TED). The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in unilateral ocular deviation and duction following orbital decompression and discuss the biomechanics of ocular imbalance. Methods Fifty-four TED patients who underwent unilateral orbital decompression were included. Fifteen patients underwent 1-wall (deep lateral wall) decompression, 18 patients underwent 2-wall (deep lateral and medial wall) decompression and 21 patients underwent 3-wall (deep lateral, medial and inferior wall) decompression. Objective and subjective deviation of the operated eyes were evaluated using the prism test and synoptophore, respectively. Ocular ductions were measured using Hirschberg’s method. The diameters of the extraocular rectus were measured by computed tomography. Results Ocular deviation and duction showed no significant difference after 1-wall decompression (p = 0.25–0.89). Esotropia increased after 2-wall decompression (p = 0.001–0.02), and hypotropia increased after 3-wall decompression (p = 0.02). Adduction increased but abduction decreased following 2-wall and 3-wall decompression (p < 0.05). Infraduction increased following 3-wall decompression (p < 0.001). Additionally, the increase in esotropia was significantly correlated with the increase in adduction and with the decrease in abduction (r = 0.37–0.63, p < 0.05). There were significant correlations between the diameter of the medial rectus and the increase in esotropia, the increase in adduction and the decrease in abduction postoperatively (r = 0.35–0.48, p < 0.05). Conclusions The changes in ocular deviation and duction were different after 1-wall, 2-wall and 3-wall orbital decompression. The increased contractile force of the rectus may be an important reason for strabismus changes after orbital decompression surgery.


2021 ◽  
Vol 82 (01) ◽  
pp. 081-090
Author(s):  
Jacquelyn Laplant ◽  
Kimberly Cockerham

Abstract Objective Primary orbital malignancy is rare. Awareness of the characteristic clinical and imaging features is imperative for timely identification and management. Surgery remains an important diagnostic and treatment modality for primary orbital malignancy, but determining the optimal surgical approach can be challenging. The purpose of this article is to explore recent advances in the diagnosis, management, and surgical approaches for primary orbital malignancies. Design In this review, the clinical presentation, imaging features, and medical and surgical management of primary orbital malignancies with representative cases will be discussed. Setting Outpatient and inpatient hospital settings. Participants Patients with diagnosed primary orbital malignancies. Main Outcome Measures Descriptive outcomes. Results Advancements in orbital imaging, microsurgical techniques, and multimodal therapy have improved the diagnosis and management of primary orbital malignancies. Special considerations for biopsy or resection are made based on the tumor's location, characteristics, nearby orbital structures, and goals of surgery. Minimally invasive techniques are supplanting traditional approaches to orbital surgery with less morbidity. Conclusions Advances in imaging technologies and surgical techniques have facilitated the diagnosis and management of primary orbital malignancies. Evolution toward less invasive orbital surgery with focus on preservation and restoration of function is underway.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae Hwi Park ◽  
Inhye Kim ◽  
Jun Hyuk Son

Abstract Background Retrobulbar hemorrhage (RBH) is a rare complication after orbital surgery but associated with ocular complications including blindness. The aim of this study was to identify clinical characteristics of patients with RBH requiring emergent orbital decompression after blowout fracture repair. Method A retrospective review of 426 blowout fracture patients at a tertiary oculoplastic clinic provided data regarding demographics, physical examination findings, and computed tomography (CT) images. Extraocular motility had been recorded in patient charts on a scale from 0 to − 4. Patients requiring emergent orbital decompression due to RBH after surgery (RBH group) were compared with those who did not (Control group), using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Incidences of RBH according to primary or secondary surgery were also investigated, using Fisher’s exact test. Result Five (1.2%) of the 426 patients who underwent blowout fracture repair developed RBH requiring emergent intervention. All RBH patients fully recovered after the decompression procedure or conservative treatment. Number of days to surgery was significantly longer in the RBH group (97.0 ± 80.1) than in the Control group (29.0 ± 253.0) (p = 0.05). Preoperative enophthalmos was also significantly greater in the RBH group (RBH vs. Control group, 3.6 ± 1.7 mm versus 1.2 ± 1.3 mm (p = 0.003)). The incidence of RBH was significantly higher in patients that underwent secondary surgery (odds ratio = 92.9 [95% confidence interval, 11.16–773.23], p = 0.001). Conclusions Surgeons should pay more attention to hemostasis and postoperative care in patients with a large preoperative enophthalmic eye, when time from injury to surgery is long and in revision cases. When RBH occurs, time to intervention and surgical decompression is critical for visual recovery and preventing blindness. Trial registration The institutional review board of the Yeungnam University Medical Center approved this study (YUMC 2018-11-010), which was conducted in accord with the Declaration of Helsinki.


1998 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 342-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise A. Mawn ◽  
David R. Jordan ◽  
Richard L. Anderson

1994 ◽  
Vol 104 (8) ◽  
pp. 950???957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Metson ◽  
Richard L. Dallow ◽  
John W. Shore

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document