An update on endoscopic orbital decompression

Multidisciplinary approach to orbital decompression. A review

Endoscopic orbital surgery has become a highly evolving multidisciplinary surgical field thanks to development in technical skills of ophthalmologists and otolaryngologists. These advances expanded the clinical application of orbital decompression, with a growing body of literature describing the multidisciplinary management of thyroid eye disease and compressive optic neuropathy, since 1990. Although techniques have improved considerably, only few Randomized Control Trials (RCT) provide evidence to support recommendations in clinical practice. This review provides an overview of the current knowledge of orbital decompression to clarify which is the most standardized therapeutic strategy. In the literature, we observed several approaches with contradicting results and the comparison of different surgical techniques was biased by inclusion of patients at different stage of disease (active or inactive), different surgical indications (dysthyroid neuropathy or disfiguring proptosis) and measures of outcomes (such as different system for ocular motility evaluation). The timing of surgical decompression is one of the debated issues. One RCT focusing on Graves’ orbitopathy showed how intravenous corticosteroids achieve better visual recovery than surgical orbital decompression; but in case of absent or poor response to medical therapy the patient should undergo surgery within two weeks. There is slight evidence that the removal of the medial and lateral wall (so-called balanced decompression) with or without fat removal could be the most effective surgical technique, with low complication rate, but an increasing number of authors are promoting, for selected cases, a pure endoscopic surgical approach (with removal of medial and infero-medial orbital wall), less invasive than the balanced one; the latter indicated to more severe proptosis or diplopia after endoscopic procedure. Three-wall decompression is chosen for high degrees of proptosis, but complications are more frequent. Timing of surgical orbital decompression, in particular when a concomitant optic neuropathy is present, is still to be determined. Additional ophthalmological procedures are needed to restore normal eye function and cosmesis. Strabismus surgery to address diplopia and lowering the position of the upper eyelid represent some of the additional steps for the final rehabilitation of Graves’ orbitopathy. The main clinical outcomes including visual acuity, proptosis, and new-onset diplopia are changing. Recent studies focused on the development of imaging measurements in order to objectively evaluate the surgical results and QOL questionnaires are gaining increasing importance.

Endoscopic versus external dacryocystorhinostomy: temporal and regional trends in the United States Medicare population

Purpose: Endoscopic surgeries, such as dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR), are increasingly performed for orbital and lacrimal conditions. This study describes and compares recent trends in endoscopic DCR with open, or external, DCR in the United States (US). Methods: Medicare-Part-B National Summary data files were analyzed from 2000 to 2015 for temporal and geographic trends in endoscopic and external DCR. Medicare Physician and Other Supplier public use files detailing provider information were collected and analyzed from 2012 to 2015. Results: Between 2000 and 2015, the number of external DCRs remained relatively unchanged (8008 to 7086, -0.7% average annual growth), while the number of endoscopic DCRs steadily increased (881 to 1674, 4.6% average annual growth). The greatest number of endoscopic DCRs were performed in the South Atlantic region, whereas the Mountain region had the greatest number per capita. From 2000 to 2015, the average payment per procedure for external DCR was $526.63, compared with $512.45 for endoscopic DCR. Of endoscopic DCRs performed from 2012 to 2015, 831 (79%) were performed by Ophthalmology, 184 (18%) were performed by Otolaryngology, and the remainder by other subspecialties. Conclusions: The number of endoscopic DCR surgeries increased over the last 15 years while the number of external DCR surgeries remained stable and continued to surpass endoscopic procedures. While ophthalmologists perform the overwhelming majority of endoscopic DCR, otolaryngologists are performing a growing number.

Surgical anatomy of the orbit. A systematic and clear study of a complex structure

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The orbit is a structure of interest for many medical specialties. Surgical approaches to the orbit present significant difficulties for the general neurosurgeon. Whoever decides to practice orbital surgery must have vast anatomical knowledge of this structure. However, although many of the existing publications about orbital anatomy show the complexity of this structure in detail, they fail to facilitate their understanding. The purpose of this study was to systematise and simplify the anatomical study of the orbit from a surgical perspective, to facilitate its understanding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review of the international literature on the subject was carried out, and the principle of the rule of 7was followed for its ordering. For illustration purposes, photographs of cadaveric preparations and digital drawings were used.

RESULTS

The orbits are 2cavities located symmetrically on both sides of the nose. They have a pyramidal shape, with 4sides, a posterior vertex, an anterior base and their axis established from the sagittal plane at a 20-degree angle. A distinctive feature of the orbit is that its elements are organised into groups of seven: 7bones, 7intraorbital extraocular muscles and 7nerves.

CONCLUSION

A systematisation of the orbital anatomy was performed with clear illustrations to simplify its study. The understanding of the anatomy of the orbit is vital to classify lesions and provides a solid basis when choosing the most appropriate approach for their treatment.