Search Results

Abstract

OBJETIVOS: Avaliar as condutas mais utilizadas no tratamento da cavidade anoftálmica no Brasil, comparando-as com a realidade mundial. MÉTODOS: Estudo exploratório, usando questionário eletrônico enviado pela Internet para oftalmologistas membros da Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Plástica Ocular, Vias Lacrimais e Órbita - SBCPO. As respostas obtidas foram avaliadas por meio de análise de aderência, utilizando o teste do Qui-quadrado. RESULTADOS: Foram recebidos 75 questionários respondidos. Cinquenta e três por cento dos entrevistados tratam cavidade anoftálmica frequentemente e o implante de esfera de polimetilmatacrilato, de 18 mm de diâmetro, é o usado pelos entrevistados na maioria das cirurgias, sendo revestido principalmente com esclera (92%). Apenas sete entrevistados já utilizaram implante acoplado com prótese externa. Oitenta e dois por cento dos entrevistados usam a técnica do enxerto dermoadiposo. O acompanhamento destes pacientes é feito semestralmente pela maior parte dos entrevistados. CONCLUSÃO: O tratamento da cavidade anoftálmica no Brasil geralmente é feito usando a esfera de polimetilmetacrilato, de diâmetro 18 milímetros. Implantes acoplados dificilmente são usados.

Keywords: Anoftalmia; Olho artificial; Órbita; Evisceração do olho; Brasil

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the practices employed by oculoplastic surgeons in the assessment and management of anophthalmic sockets and external ocular prostheses.
METHODS: Oculoplastic surgeons from two countries, who specialized in the management of anophthalmic sockets, participated in a web-based survey. Data collected included demographics, types of surgery, implant use, external ocular prostheses management (including fabrication and cleaning), complications encountered, and follow-up times. The frequencies and distributions of the responses were statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 177 oculoplastic surgeons participated, 113 (63.8%) from Brazil, the remainder from Spain. Evisceration was the preferred surgical procedure of 149 (84.2%) surgeons. The most commonly reported indication for enucleation was a painful blind eye (n=103, 58.1%; both Brazil and Spain, p<0.001). Brazilian surgeons preferred polymethyl methacrylate implants (n=65, 57.5%), while Spanish surgeons favored porous polyethylene implants (n=53, 82.8%; p<0.001). Discharge was the most frequently observed clinical feature during socket evaluation (n=164, 92.6%; p<0.001). Brazilian surgeons recommended daily (n=53, 46.9%) or weekly (n=41, 36.2%) cleaning of external ocular prostheses, while Spanish surgeons more commonly recommended monthly cleaning (n=31, 48.4%; p<0.001). The majority of Brazilian surgeons (n=83, 73.4%) advised patients to remove their external ocular prostheses at night. Only a small number of Spanish surgeons (n=3, 4.6%) suggested this practice (p<0.001). Overall, the follow-up recommendations varied, with 70 (39.5%) surgeons recommending follow-up based on individual case needs, and 59 (33.3%) suggesting annual visits (p<0.001). The primary indications for external ocular prostheses replacement were edge damage (n=75, 42.3%) and loss of volume (n=68, 38.4%). The replacement intervals given typically ranged from 1 to 5 years (n=92, 51.9%; p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Oculoplastic surgeons in Brazil and Spain demonstrated similar practices in the management of anophthalmic sockets. However, notable differences were observed in the choice of implant materials, cleaning protocols, and recommendations regarding external ocular prostheses removal during sleep.

Keywords: Anophthalmos; Eye, artificial; Polymethyl methacrylate; Polyethylene; Surgeons; Surveys and questionnaires; Brazil; Spain.