Yurdal GEZERCAN, Kemal Alper AFŞER, Hakan MİLLET, Ismail ISTEMEN, Ali Ihsan OKTEN

Orbital tumors: An analysis of fourteen cases

Aim: Orbital tumors are rarely seen in neurosurgery practice. They have quite variable clinical results, and are often reported in the literature as a series in relation to the patient’s age, geographical factors, and whether they were treated at neurosurgery or ophthalmology clinics. In our study, we evaluated the pathological results, demographic characteristics, and clinical results of patients who had undergone surgery for orbital tumors in our clinic.Material and Methods: Fourteen patients who were operated on between 2012 and 2017 at the Adana City Training and Research Hospital were investigated in this study. The patient files and radiological investigations were evaluated retrospectively, and the patients were followed up for 22 months (min-max: 14-28 months) ona verage. The patients were evaluated in terms of their admission complaints, preoperative and postoperative neurological examination findings, surgical approaches, pathologic results, and complications.Results: Eight patients (57%) were females, 6 (43%) were males, and their average age was 49.4 years old (min-max:19-86). The most common admission complaint was swelling around the eye, which was observed in 12 (85%) of the patients. The computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging scans of all of the patients were investigated before their operations. The masses were removed from 5 (35%) patients with lesions located in the anterior and lateral areas using a lateral canthotomy technique. A fronto-orbital zygomaticapproachwas preferred for5 (35%) patients with intracranial extensions of the tumors toward the temporal fossa or frontal region. A fronto-orbitalapproach was preferred in 4 (28%) of the patients with tumor locations in the posterior and medial chambers. The masses were totally removed in 11 (79%) of the patients and subtotally removed in 3 (21%) patients.Conclusion: Overall, orbital masses are rarely observed, and their pathological profiles vary according to the patient’s age, geographical region, and location. Different approaches may be preferred during surgical removal; however, the overall purpose is to remove the mass without leading to neural and cosmetic complications.

PDF

___

Günalp I, Gündüz K. Biopsy-proven orbital lesions in Turkey. A survey of 1092 cases over 30 years. Orbit 1994;13:67-79.
Henderson JW, Campbell RJ, Farrow GM, et al. Orbital Tumors, 3rd ed. New York: Raven Press; 1994;43-52.
Seregard S, Sahlin S. Panorama of orbital space-occupying lesions. The 24-year experience of a referral centre. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1999;77:91-8.
hields JA, Bakewell B, Augsburger JJ, Fet al. Classification and incidence of space-occupying lesions of the orbit. A survey of 645 biopsies. Arch Ophthalmol 1984;102:1606-11.
Wilson MW, Buggage RR, Grossniklaus HE. Orbital lesions in the southeastern United States. Orbit 19956;15:17-24.
Dermirci H, Shields CL, Shields JA, et al. Orbital tumors in the older population. Ophthalmology 2002;109:243-8.
Kennedy RE. An evaluation of 820 orbital cases. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1984;82:134-57.
Kodsi SR, Shetler DJ, Cambell RJ, ET AL. A review of 340 orbital tumors in children during a 60-year period. AJO 1994;117:177-82.
Moss H. Expanding lesions of the orbit. A clinical study of 230 consecutive cases. AJO 1962;54:761-70.
Rootman J. Frequency and differential diagnosis of orbital disease. In: Rootman J, editor. Disease of the orbit: a multidisciplinary approach. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1989. p. 119-139.
Shields JA, Bakewell B, Augsburger JJ, et al. Space-occupying orbital masses in children. A review of 250 consecutive biopsies. Ophthalmology 1986;93:379-84.
Margo CE, Mulla ZD. Malignant tumors of the orbit. Analysis of the Florida Cancer Registry. Ophthalmology 1998;105:185-90.
Kiratli H, Bulur B, Bilgiç S. Transconjunctival approach for retrobulbar intraconal orbital cavernous hemangiomas. Orbital surgeon’s perspective. Surg Neurol 2005;64:71-4.
Maier W, Ridder GJ, Kaminsky J, et al. Therapy of posterior orbital tumors [in German]. Ophthalmologe 2011;108:531-9.
Maroon JC, Kennerdell JS. Microsurgical approach to orbital tumors. Clin Neurosurg 1979;26:479-89.
Natori Y, Rhoton AL Jr. Transcranial approach to the orbit: microsurgical anatomy. J Neurosurg 1994;81(1):78-86.
Sieskiewicz A, Lyson T, Mariak Z, et al. Endoscopic transnasal approach for biopsy of orbital tumours using image-guided neuro-navigation system. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2008;150:441-5.
Bullock JD, Goldberg SH, Rakes SM. Orbital tumors in children. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1989;5:13-6.
Shields JA, Shields CL, Scartozzi R, Survey of 1264 Patients with Orbital Tumors and Simulating Lesions: The 2002 Montgomery Lecture, Part. Ophthalmology 2004;111:997-1008.
Ohtsuka K, Hashimoto M, Suzuki Y A Review of 244 Orbital Tumors in Japanese Patients During a 21-Year Period: Origins and Locations. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2005;49:49-55.
Gonen L, Nov E, Shimony N, Shofty B, Margalit N. Sphenoorbital meningioma: surgical series and design of an intraoperative management algorithm Neurosurg Rev 2018;41:291-301
Fukushima T, Tsuchimochi H, Yamamoto M, et al. Surgical approach to the cavernous angioma of the orbit with special reference to the orbital microsurgical anatomy. Jpn J Neurosurg (Tokyo) 1998;7:609-14.
Forrest AW. Intraorbital tumors. Arch Ophthalmol 1949;41: 198–232.16. Liaricos S, Gekas L. Orbital tumors in children. Orbit 1984;3:25-31.
Seiichiro M, Yoshinori H, Kentaro H, Naokatu S Superolateral Orbitotomy for Intraorbital Tumors: Comparison with the Conventional Approach. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2016;77:473-8.
Maroon JC, Kennerdell JS. Surgical approaches to the orbit. Indications and techniques. J Neurosurg 1984;60:1226-35.