| Literature DB >> 28275981 |
Ahmed Mohamed Kamal Elshafei1, Mohamed Farouk Sayed1, Raafat Mohyeldeen Abdelrahman Abdallah2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this paper is to study the etiology, clinical findings, and outcomes of management of cases of orbital cellulitis treated in Minia University Hospital in Upper Egypt over the period of 6 years from July 2009 to July 2015. One-hundred two patients diagnosed to have orbital cellulitis were admitted to the hospital and treated on inpatient basis from July 2009 to July 2015. All patients were subjected to full ophthalmological examination, systemic evaluation, and ear, nose, and throat (ENT) consultation. Axial and coronal CT scan and orbital echography were done for all patients. All patients received medical treatments, and 20 patients needed surgical intervention.Entities:
Keywords: Orbital cellulitis; Sinusitis; Subperiosteal abscess
Year: 2017 PMID: 28275981 PMCID: PMC5342996 DOI: 10.1186/s12348-017-0126-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ophthalmic Inflamm Infect ISSN: 1869-5760
Fig. 1Etiology of orbital cellulitis. a Sinusitis. b Traumatic. c Dental infection
Summary of the clinical data
| Clinical presentation | Descriptive statistics (Number = 102) |
|---|---|
| Sinusitis | |
| No | 36 (35.3%) |
| Ethmoidal | 36 (35.3%) |
| Frontal | 6 (5.9%) |
| Mixed | 24 (23.5%) |
| Fever | |
| No | 40 (39.2%) |
| Yes | 62 (60.8%) |
| Punctate keratitis | |
| No | 80 (78.4%) |
| Yes | 22 (21.6%) |
| Relative afferent pupillary defect | |
| No | 84 (82.4%) |
| Yes | 18 (17.6%) |
| Subperiosteal abscess | |
| No | 86 (84.3%) |
| Upper | 10 (9.8%) |
| Nasal | 4 (3.9%) |
| Upper and nasal | 2 (2%) |
Fig. 2Subperiosteal abscess. a Preoperative. b Postoperative
Fig. 3Correlation between the duration of hospital admission in days (D) and age of the patients in years (Y)
Correlation between the duration of hospital admission and age and surgical interference
| Variable | Duration of hospital admission | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Agea | 0.476 | <0.001* |
| Surgical interferenceb | 0.360 | 0.009* |
aPearson’s correlation
bSpearman’s rho correlation
*Significant correlation at P value ≤0.05
Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at the first presentation and at the end of treatment
| BCVA | Presenting | Final |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| BCVA | BCVA | ||
| (Number = 96) | (Number = 96) | ||
| No PL | 12 (12.5%) | 14 (14.6%) | <0.001* |
| ≤1/60 | 2 (2.1%) | 0 (0%) | |
| ≤6/60 | 4 (4.2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 6/36 | 2 (2.1%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 6/24 | 4 (4.2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 6/18 | 8 (8.3%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 6/12 | 26 (27.1%) | 8 (8.3%) | |
| 6/9 | 26 (27.1%) | 32 (33.3%) | |
| 6/6 | 12 (12.5%) | 42 (43.8%) |
BCVA best corrected visual acuity, No PL no perception of light
*Significant difference at P value ≤0.05
The overall visual outcome at the end of treatment
| Visual outcome | Ranks | Number |
|---|---|---|
| Final BCVA versus presenting BCVA | Negative ranks | 4a |
| Positive ranks | 56b | |
| Ties | 36c | |
| Total | 96 |
BCVA best corrected visual acuity
aFinal BCVA < presenting BCVA
bFinal BCVA > presenting BCVA
cFinal BCVA = presenting BCVA
Correlation between the final best corrected visual acuity and other clinical variables
| Clinical variables | Final best corrected visual acuity | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| SPA | −0.437 | 0.002* |
| Age | −0.353 | 0.014* |
| Hospital stay | −0.519 | <0.001* |
| RAPD | −0.558 | <0.001* |
| Surgical interference | −0.491 | <0.001* |
| Corneal affection | −0.605 | <0.001* |
| Fever | 0.300 | 0.038* |
| Sinusitis | 0.290 | 0.046* |
| Mucormycosis | −0.290 | 0.046* |
| Dental affection | −0.314 | 0.018* |
| Distant infection | −0.431 | 0.002* |
| Panophthalmitis | −0.216 | 0.140 |
| Penetration eye trauma | −0.080 | 0.587 |
| Trauma + foreign body | −0.056 | 0.704 |
SPA subperiosteal abscess, RAPD relative afferent pupillary defect
aSpearman’s rho correlation
*Significant correlation at P value ≤0.05