DOG Deutsche Ophthalmologische Gesellschaft 105. DOG-Kongress
  English Site  
  DOG Congress Home

Invitation
Organization, Deadlines
Overview of the Congress

Scientific Programme
Opening Ceremony
Ceremony 150 Years of DOG
Thursday, 20.September
Friday, 21.September
Saturday, 22.September
Sunday, 23.September
Poster Sessions
Symposia
Courses
Satellite Programme

Information
Social Programme
Sponsors, Exhibitors

DOG Homepage
 

Abstract

DO.24.09

Comparison of 5 cases with intraocular medulloepithelioma

Holdt M., Bölöni R., Jurklies C., Bornfeld N.
Abteilung für Erkrankungen des hinteren Augenabschnitts, Zentrum für Augenheilkunde, Universitätsklinikum Essen

Objective: Several single case reports of patients with intraocular medulloepithelioma are published. The comparison of 5 patients of our hospital shall present the similarities and varieties.
Methods: Case history, examination reports, therapeutical procedure and histological results will be compared.
Results: All 5 cases are children at the age of 3 to 11 years. The tumor was strict unilateral. Red eye and decrease of visual acuity were the most common symptoms in the beginning. All tumors were located at the ciliary body, in 4 cases with seeding in the anterior chamber, in 2 cases with vitreous seeding, in 1 case with metastasis at the posterior pole. Secondary glaucoma was observed in 4 cases, 1 patient was multiple cyclophotocoagulated. 2 patients with luxatio lentis were treated with ppL. In 1 case a biopsy of the anterior chamber was necessary. Finally all eyes were enucleated. Histological there were medullary epithelial cells with different grading. In 1 case we saw a metastasis with a high rate of proliferation. A higher malignant grade was supposed in this case.
Conclusions: The comparison presents in all 5 cases a strict unilateral intraocular medulloepithelioma. In 4 cases there was a severe decrease of visual acuity up to blindness and an arguable tumor progression. Enucleation was necessary in all 5 cases. Only histological findings ensured the diagnosis of a medulloepithelioma. There was no extraocular tumor affection. The children developed no severe complications.

 
Previous page    
Top of page