K Neumann1, D Ehrich, M Bloching. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-, Nasen-, Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg. kerstin.neumann@medizin.uni-halle.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Orbital foreign bodies constitute an interdisciplinary challenge, diagnosis being especially difficult because of inconspicuous entrance orifices. Indication for the removal of an orbital foreign body has always to be decided upon individually taking into account the benefits and risks resulting from an operation. The latter is particularly indicated if there are acute and chronic functional restrictions or inflammatory reactions either present or to be expected. The objective of our study was to produce systematic guidelines concerning the therapeutic procedure of dealing with orbital foreign bodies with a view to a benefit-risk assessment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Over the last ten years ten patients with an orbital foreign body were treated in our Department, four of them requiring acute attention. CTs were taken of all patients. Only in one case additional MRTs were produced. Eight out of ten patients underwent operation, of which seven resulted in a complete removal of the foreign body. In the case of two patients we decided against an operation after interdisciplinary consultation. RESULTS: In our view the imaging--providing diagnostics by means of computer tomography is the most promising method for determining a foreign body in the orbit. Decision for an operative removal of a foreign body was invariably taken interdisciplinary in cooperation with an ophthalmologist. Surgical approach was chosen in accordance with the localisation of the foreign bodies. None of the patients suffered from a loss of vision or a restriction of functions as a result of the operation. CONCLUSIONS: In the indication the foreign material is of essential importance. Orbital foreign bodies that have been present in the tissue for a longer time can be allowed to stay, unless loss of functions are progressive. Loss of vision always being a consequence of the initial trauma.
BACKGROUND: Orbital foreign bodies constitute an interdisciplinary challenge, diagnosis being especially difficult because of inconspicuous entrance orifices. Indication for the removal of an orbital foreign body has always to be decided upon individually taking into account the benefits and risks resulting from an operation. The latter is particularly indicated if there are acute and chronic functional restrictions or inflammatory reactions either present or to be expected. The objective of our study was to produce systematic guidelines concerning the therapeutic procedure of dealing with orbital foreign bodies with a view to a benefit-risk assessment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Over the last ten years ten patients with an orbital foreign body were treated in our Department, four of them requiring acute attention. CTs were taken of all patients. Only in one case additional MRTs were produced. Eight out of ten patients underwent operation, of which seven resulted in a complete removal of the foreign body. In the case of two patients we decided against an operation after interdisciplinary consultation. RESULTS: In our view the imaging--providing diagnostics by means of computer tomography is the most promising method for determining a foreign body in the orbit. Decision for an operative removal of a foreign body was invariably taken interdisciplinary in cooperation with an ophthalmologist. Surgical approach was chosen in accordance with the localisation of the foreign bodies. None of the patients suffered from a loss of vision or a restriction of functions as a result of the operation. CONCLUSIONS: In the indication the foreign material is of essential importance. Orbital foreign bodies that have been present in the tissue for a longer time can be allowed to stay, unless loss of functions are progressive. Loss of vision always being a consequence of the initial trauma.