[Does orbital exenteration still has a place in 2019?] / L'exentération orbitaire a-t-elle encore sa place en 2019 ?

INTRODUCTION: Orbital exenteration is a radical anatomically and psychologically disfiguring procedure. It is mostly performed for management of orbital cancers or cancers with orbital involvement. The lack of benefit in terms of overall survival and the development of new molecular therapies (targeted therapies, immunotherapy) in recent years leads us to question its use. The goal of our review is to answer to the following question: is orbital exenteration a viable procedure in 2019? MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature review was performed using the PUBMED and MEDLINE databases. The following terms were used then crossed with each other: "orbital exenteration", "exenterated socket", "overall survival", "life expectancy", "orbital reconstruction", "socket reconstruction". Oncology articles from the past 15 years were included and separated into those in the oculoplastic literature and those in the ENT literature. RESULTS: Nineteen articles were included in this review. Eyelid tumours represent the main etiology of orbital exenteration. Basal cell carcinoma is the most frequently incriminated tumor, while sebaceous carcinoma and conjunctival squamous cell carcinoma are the most frequently encountered in Asian series. Non-conservative orbital exenteration is the most prevalent surgery performed. Orbital reconstruction depends on the surgeon's speciality: healing by secondary intention and split thickness skin grafts are mostly performed by oculoplastic surgeons, whereas regional or free flaps are mostly performed by ENT surgeons. Cerebrospinal fluid leakage is the most common intraoperative complication, encountered in 0 to 13 % of cases. The most common postoperative complications are ethmoid fistula and infection of the operative site, encountered in 0 to 50 % and 0 to 43 % of cases respectively. Orbital exenteration allows surgical resection of R0 tumors in 42.5 % to 97 % of cases. Overall survival following orbital exenteration is 83 % (50.5-97) and 65 % (37-92) at 1 and 5 years respectively. Identified risk factors for poor overall survival are: age, tumor histology (worse prognosis with choroidal melanoma, better prognosis with basal cell carcinoma), non-R0 surgical resection, locally advanced tumors (size>20mm, BCVA<20/400 and the presence of metastases at diagnosis). Recent studies have demonstrated favorable outcomes when managing locally advanced basal cell carcinoma, lacrimal gland cancer and conjunctival melanoma with targeted therapies or immunotherapies without performing orbital exenteration. CONCLUSION: Orbital exenteration remains a major part of our therapeutic arsenal. Although orbital exenteration has failed to demonstrate any overall survival benefit, it allows satisfactory local control of the disease with an increasingly less invasive procedure. The development of targeted therapies and immunotherapies may change our therapeutic decisions in the future.

Orbital Exenteration: A 23-year Report.

PURPOSE: Orbital exenteration is a psychologically and anatomically disfiguring procedure which indicated in some patients with malignant or progressive diseases of orbital and periorbital area. In this study, we reviewed 176 patients that underwent orbital exenteration. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of medical records from all patients who underwent orbital exenteration from March 1991 to March 2014 in oculoplastic department at an eye care center. Demographic data, diagnosis, site of primary involvement and technique of surgery were determined in patients. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six cases of orbital exenteration were included that had documented histopathology. The age of patients ranged from 1 to 91 years (mean age ± standard deviation, 55.43 ± 27 years). Ninety-seven (55.11%) males and 79 (44.88%) females were included. Fifteen different tumors were identified. The most common indication was patients with basal cell carcinoma 49 (28%) followed by 41 (23.5%) squamous cell carcinomas, 35 (20%) retinoblastoma, and 13 (7%) adenoid cystic carcinomas. In total, adnexal malignancies were the most common tumors, secondarily involving the orbit. Eyelids 89 (50.5%) and the globe 43 (24%) were the most frequent site of involvement. Three types of exenteration were performed, based on available data of 129 operation sheets, 46 (35.7%) subtotal, 62 (48.1%) total, and 21 (16.3%) cases of extensive exenterations. In total 97 cases were evaluated pathologically for perineural involvement, of which perineural invasion was noted in 9 (7%) reports. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of exenteration in our center has increased in past 3 years and the majority of cases were eyelid basal cell carcinoma. Patient education considering periocular lesions can help in earlier diagnosis of malignant lesions and therefore reducing the number of exenteration.