Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Feb;59(2):153-5.
doi: 10.1136/jcp.2005.029744.

Twenty year review of histopathological findings in enucleated/eviscerated eyes

M U Saeed  1 , B Y P Chang, M Khandwala, A G Shivane, A Chakrabarty
Affiliations

Twenty year review of histopathological findings in enucleated/eviscerated eyes

M U Saeed et al. J Clin Pathol. 2006 Feb.

Abstract

Background/aims: To evaluate the need for routine histopathological analysis of enucleated/eviscerated eyes and changes in indications for eye removal.

Methods: Retrospective review of all enucleation/evisceration histopathology reports over 20 years. Clinical history was correlated with pathological findings. Two 10 year periods (1984-93, 1994-2003) were compared to detect changes in indications for eye removal.

Results: In total, 285 histopathology results were traced from 1984 to 2003; 161 and 124 were evisceration and enucleation specimens, respectively. Glaucoma, malignant melanoma, trauma, and retinal detachment were the most frequent diagnoses 1984-1993. Ocular trauma was the most frequent diagnosis 1994-2003, followed by phthisis bulbi and endophthalmitis. Three cases were diagnosed as metastatic carcinoma; all were suspected preoperatively. A fourth case was a diagnostic surprise: adenocarcinoma found in an eye removed for pain and phthisis. Comparison of two 10 year periods showed a decrease in the number of enucleations/eviscerations, perhaps reflecting a decrease in the number of specimens sent. A preference for eviscerations was evident over the 20 years.

Conclusion: The number of eyes removed and histologically analysed decreased in the period 1994 to 2003, perhaps because of better treatment options, allowing globe preservation. There was a significant shift in the diagnosis in the two time periods, and a preference for evisceration in both. Only one diagnostic surprise was discovered (0.35%). This study does not support the need to send all globes/contents for histopathological examination. However, because of the one unexpected finding, it is recommended where the examination is incomplete or the history of visual loss is unclear.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Dortzbach R K, Woog J J. Choice of procedure. Enucleation, evisceration, or prosthetic fitting over globes. Ophthalmology 1985921249–1255. - PubMed
    1. Hansen A B, Petersen C, Heegaard S.et al Review of 1028 bulbar eviscerations and enucleations. Changes in aetiology and frequency over a 20‐year period. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 199977331–335. - PubMed
    1. Levine M R, Pou C R, Lash R H. The 1998 Wendell Hughes lecture. Evisceration: is sympathetic ophthalmia a concern in the new millennium?, Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1999154–8. - PubMed
    1. Genevois O, Millet P, Retout A.et al Comparison after 10 years of two 100‐patient cohorts operated on for eviscerations or enucleations. Eur J Ophthalmol 200414363–368. - PubMed
    1. de Gottrau P, Holbach L M, Naumann G O. Clinicopathological review of 1146 enucleations (1980–90). Br J Ophthalmol 199478260–265. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms