Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.

<h4>Purpose</h4>To investigate the current practice of enucleation with or without orbital implant for retinoblastoma in countries across the world.<h4>Methods</h4>A digital survey identifying operation techniques and material used for orbital implants after enucleation in pa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Daphne L Mourits, Dyonne T Hartong, Machteld I Bosscha, Roel J H M Kloos, Annette C Moll
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2015-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121292
_version_ 1818837854716952576
author Daphne L Mourits
Dyonne T Hartong
Machteld I Bosscha
Roel J H M Kloos
Annette C Moll
author_facet Daphne L Mourits
Dyonne T Hartong
Machteld I Bosscha
Roel J H M Kloos
Annette C Moll
author_sort Daphne L Mourits
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Purpose</h4>To investigate the current practice of enucleation with or without orbital implant for retinoblastoma in countries across the world.<h4>Methods</h4>A digital survey identifying operation techniques and material used for orbital implants after enucleation in patients with retinoblastoma.<h4>Results</h4>We received a response of 58 surgeons in 32 different countries. A primary artificial implant is routinely inserted by 42 (72.4%) surgeons. Ten (17.2%) surgeons leave the socket empty, three (5.2%) decide per case. Other surgeons insert a dermis fat graft as a standard primary implant (n=1), or fill the socket in a standard secondary procedure (n=2; one uses dermis fat grafts and one artificial implants). The choice for porous implants was more frequent than for non-porous implants: 27 (58.7%) and 15 (32.6%), respectively. Both porous and non-porous implant types are used by 4 (8.7%) surgeons. Twenty-five surgeons (54.3%) insert bare implants, 11 (23.9%) use separate wrappings, eight (17.4%) use implants with prefab wrapping and two insert implants with and without wrapping depending on type of implant. Attachment of the muscles to the wrapping or implant (at various locations) is done by 31 (53.4%) surgeons. Eleven (19.0%) use a myoconjunctival technique, nine (15.5%) suture the muscles to each other and seven (12.1%) do not reattach the muscles. Measures to improve volume are implant exchange at an older age (n=4), the use of Restylane SQ (n=1) and osmotic expanders (n=1). Pegging is done by two surgeons.<h4>Conclusion</h4>No (worldwide) consensus exists about the use of material and techniques for enucleation for the treatment of retinoblastoma. Considerations for the use of different techniques are discussed.
first_indexed 2024-12-19T03:29:07Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4e7c6df8a3e74b75bbe2b9d624e52ab5
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-19T03:29:07Z
publishDate 2015-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-4e7c6df8a3e74b75bbe2b9d624e52ab52022-12-21T20:37:32ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032015-01-01103e012129210.1371/journal.pone.0121292Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.Daphne L MouritsDyonne T HartongMachteld I BosschaRoel J H M KloosAnnette C Moll<h4>Purpose</h4>To investigate the current practice of enucleation with or without orbital implant for retinoblastoma in countries across the world.<h4>Methods</h4>A digital survey identifying operation techniques and material used for orbital implants after enucleation in patients with retinoblastoma.<h4>Results</h4>We received a response of 58 surgeons in 32 different countries. A primary artificial implant is routinely inserted by 42 (72.4%) surgeons. Ten (17.2%) surgeons leave the socket empty, three (5.2%) decide per case. Other surgeons insert a dermis fat graft as a standard primary implant (n=1), or fill the socket in a standard secondary procedure (n=2; one uses dermis fat grafts and one artificial implants). The choice for porous implants was more frequent than for non-porous implants: 27 (58.7%) and 15 (32.6%), respectively. Both porous and non-porous implant types are used by 4 (8.7%) surgeons. Twenty-five surgeons (54.3%) insert bare implants, 11 (23.9%) use separate wrappings, eight (17.4%) use implants with prefab wrapping and two insert implants with and without wrapping depending on type of implant. Attachment of the muscles to the wrapping or implant (at various locations) is done by 31 (53.4%) surgeons. Eleven (19.0%) use a myoconjunctival technique, nine (15.5%) suture the muscles to each other and seven (12.1%) do not reattach the muscles. Measures to improve volume are implant exchange at an older age (n=4), the use of Restylane SQ (n=1) and osmotic expanders (n=1). Pegging is done by two surgeons.<h4>Conclusion</h4>No (worldwide) consensus exists about the use of material and techniques for enucleation for the treatment of retinoblastoma. Considerations for the use of different techniques are discussed.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121292
spellingShingle Daphne L Mourits
Dyonne T Hartong
Machteld I Bosscha
Roel J H M Kloos
Annette C Moll
Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.
PLoS ONE
title Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.
title_full Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.
title_fullStr Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.
title_full_unstemmed Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.
title_short Worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma: an international survey.
title_sort worldwide enucleation techniques and materials for treatment of retinoblastoma an international survey
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121292
work_keys_str_mv AT daphnelmourits worldwideenucleationtechniquesandmaterialsfortreatmentofretinoblastomaaninternationalsurvey
AT dyonnethartong worldwideenucleationtechniquesandmaterialsfortreatmentofretinoblastomaaninternationalsurvey
AT machteldibosscha worldwideenucleationtechniquesandmaterialsfortreatmentofretinoblastomaaninternationalsurvey
AT roeljhmkloos worldwideenucleationtechniquesandmaterialsfortreatmentofretinoblastomaaninternationalsurvey
AT annettecmoll worldwideenucleationtechniquesandmaterialsfortreatmentofretinoblastomaaninternationalsurvey