Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends
Do you wish to request the book?
UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
UK national survey of enucleation, evisceration and orbital implant trends
2007
Overview
Aim: To evaluate current clinical practice in the UK in the management of the anophthalmic socket; choice of enucleation, evisceration, type of orbital implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. Methods: All consultant ophthalmologists in the UK were surveyed by postal questionnaire. Questions included their practice subspecialty and number of enucleations and eviscerations performed in 2003. Specific questions addressed choice of implant, wrap, motility pegging and complications. Results: 456/896 (51%) consultants responded, of which 162 (35%) had a specific interest in oculoplastics, lacrimal, orbits or oncology. Only 243/456 (53%) did enucleations or eviscerations. 92% inserted an orbital implant after primary enucleation, 69% after non-endophthalmitis evisceration, whereas only 43% did so after evisceration for endophthalmitis (50% as a delayed procedure). 55% used porous orbital implants (porous polyethylene, hydroxyapatite or alumina) as their first choice and 42% used acrylic. Most implants inserted were spherical, sized 18–20 mm in diameter. 57% wrapped the implant after enucleation, using salvaged autogenous sclera (20%), donor sclera (28%) and synthetic Vicryl or Mersilene mesh (42%). A minority (7%) placed motility pegs in selected cases, usually as a secondary procedure. 14% of respondents reported implant exposure for each type of procedure and extrusion was reported by 4% after enucleation and 3% after evisceration. Conclusions: This survey highlights contemporary anophthalmic socket practice in the UK. Most surgeons use porous orbital implants with a synthetic wrap after enucleation and only few perform motility pegging.
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd,BMJ,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Group
Subject
Biological and medical sciences
/ Eye Enucleation - adverse effects
/ Eye Enucleation - statistics & numerical data
/ Eye Evisceration - adverse effects
/ Eye Evisceration - statistics & numerical data
/ Glaucoma
/ Humans
/ Intraoperative Care - methods
/ Motility
/ Ophthalmology - statistics & numerical data
/ Orbital Implants - adverse effects
/ Orbital Implants - statistics & numerical data
/ Professional Practice - statistics & numerical data
/ Surgery
/ Trends
