PURPOSE: To review the clinical and histopathologic findings associated with subepidermal calcinosis of the eyelids. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on subepidermal calcinosis of the eyelids was performed. Cases included were idiopathic in nature and met the histologic criteria for subepidermal calcinosis with calcium deposits in the dermis of the skin. RESULTS: Twenty-one publications presenting 53 cases of subepidermal calcinosis involving the eyelids were published between 1970 and 2016. Males were affected more than females (67% vs. 33%), and 89% of patients were 21 years of age or younger. A total of 63% were non-Caucasian. Most cases involved a single lesion (82%), and lesions were most frequently located on the upper eyelid (63%). In 81% of cases, the lesion was less than 5 mm in diameter. When reported, the treatment of choice was complete surgical excision. CONCLUSIONS: Subepidermal calcinosis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of idiopathic lesions on the eyelid, particularly in young males with no history of systemic disease or laboratory abnormalities. These nodules usually present as painless, small, firm, mobile solitary cutaneous lesions with a predilection for the upper eyelid. Diagnosis is confirmed by histopathology, and treatment is with surgical excision.
PURPOSE: To review the clinical and histopathologic findings associated with subepidermal calcinosis of the eyelids. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on subepidermal calcinosis of the eyelids was performed. Cases included were idiopathic in nature and met the histologic criteria for subepidermal calcinosis with calcium deposits in the dermis of the skin. RESULTS: Twenty-one publications presenting 53 cases of subepidermal calcinosis involving the eyelids were published between 1970 and 2016. Males were affected more than females (67% vs. 33%), and 89% of patients were 21 years of age or younger. A total of 63% were non-Caucasian. Most cases involved a single lesion (82%), and lesions were most frequently located on the upper eyelid (63%). In 81% of cases, the lesion was less than 5 mm in diameter. When reported, the treatment of choice was complete surgical excision. CONCLUSIONS:Subepidermal calcinosis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of idiopathic lesions on the eyelid, particularly in young males with no history of systemic disease or laboratory abnormalities. These nodules usually present as painless, small, firm, mobile solitary cutaneous lesions with a predilection for the upper eyelid. Diagnosis is confirmed by histopathology, and treatment is with surgical excision.