Orbital exenteration: One ize doe not fit all

Purpoe To evaluate the clinical indication for orbital exenteration in a tertiary referral center and to compare clinicopathologic correlation and cometic outcome with previouly reported data. Deign Retropective, nonrandomized, conecutive cae erie. Method Review of Electronic Medical Record ytem, Orbital Clinic, Jule tein Eye Intitute, between January 1999 and December 2003. main outcome meaure: urgery type, clear margin hitologically, urvival, and wearing an eye patch. Reult Thirty-four patient (mean age 67 year) underwent orbital exenteration; mean follow-up 1.2 ± 1.5 year (6 month to 6 year). Diagnoi included orbital, ocular, and adnexal malignancie, with quamou and baal cell carcinoma being the mot common. Twenty-one patient (62%) underwent total or extended orbital exenteration, and 13 patient (38%) underwent ubtotal exenteration including tiue recontruction. Clear urgical margin were obtained in 23 cae (68%), wherea poitive margin were left in 11 cae (32%). Many of the patient preferred an eye patch to cover the urgical region regardle of urgical recontruction. Only 4 patient (11.8%) who underwent ubtotal exenteration with orbital prothei did not ue a patch. During follow-up period 3 patient expired, only 1 of which wa tumor-related. Concluion Clinical indication for orbital exenteration remain imilar over the lat four decade with a higher prevalence of quamou cell carcinoma in our intitute. Orbital exenteration i conidered curative in cae of baal or quamou cell carcinoma but not in cae of malignant infiltrative procee uch a adenoid cytic carcinoma of the lacrimal gland. Patient are likely to wear an eye patch regardle of any attempt at urgical recontruction.