F G Ah-Fat1, B E Damato. 1. St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the mode of presentation of uveal melanomas, delays in their diagnosis and the effect of delayed diagnosis on treatment outcome. METHODS: An analysis was carried out of 50 consecutive patients undergoing treatment for uveal melanoma at the Ocular Oncology Service in Liverpool. The mode of presentation of the tumour, onset of symptoms and subsequent management were determined by interview at the time of treatment. RESULTS: Seventy-two per cent of patients had one or more symptoms directly attributable to the tumour. These included blurred vision (36%), photopsia (22%), visual field loss (16%), floaters (4%) and metamorphopsia (4%). Forty-two per cent of patients experienced delays in the diagnosis and treatment due to misdiagnoses such as macular degeneration and naevus or due to the lesion being missed at the initial visit. Patients who had experienced delays in diagnosis received treatment after a mean of 6.6 months compared with 4.2 weeks for those who did not experience any delay (p = 0.003). Such patients were more likely to be treated by enucleation (52% vs 17%, p = 0.008) than by an eye-conserving method such as radiotherapy or trans-scleral local resection. CONCLUSIONS: The primary aim of treatment of uveal melanoma is to reduce the risk of death from metastases and a secondary aim is to conserve the eye with as much vision as possible. This study identifies common reasons for delays in the diagnosis of uveal melanoma. While the effect of early treatment on survival remains controversial, this study shows that patients who have their tumours diagnosed promptly are more likely to be treated by an eye-conserving method than by enucleation.
PURPOSE: To investigate the mode of presentation of uveal melanomas, delays in their diagnosis and the effect of delayed diagnosis on treatment outcome. METHODS: An analysis was carried out of 50 consecutive patients undergoing treatment for uveal melanoma at the Ocular Oncology Service in Liverpool. The mode of presentation of the tumour, onset of symptoms and subsequent management were determined by interview at the time of treatment. RESULTS: Seventy-two per cent of patients had one or more symptoms directly attributable to the tumour. These included blurred vision (36%), photopsia (22%), visual field loss (16%), floaters (4%) and metamorphopsia (4%). Forty-two per cent of patients experienced delays in the diagnosis and treatment due to misdiagnoses such as macular degeneration and naevus or due to the lesion being missed at the initial visit. Patients who had experienced delays in diagnosis received treatment after a mean of 6.6 months compared with 4.2 weeks for those who did not experience any delay (p = 0.003). Such patients were more likely to be treated by enucleation (52% vs 17%, p = 0.008) than by an eye-conserving method such as radiotherapy or trans-scleral local resection. CONCLUSIONS: The primary aim of treatment of uveal melanoma is to reduce the risk of death from metastases and a secondary aim is to conserve the eye with as much vision as possible. This study identifies common reasons for delays in the diagnosis of uveal melanoma. While the effect of early treatment on survival remains controversial, this study shows that patients who have their tumours diagnosed promptly are more likely to be treated by an eye-conserving method than by enucleation.