Single or double? A comparison of evisceration techniques

Abstract

Purpose: We compared the rates of implant exposure and extrusion after evisceration with single and double scleral closure techniques.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent evisceration with an implant insertion over the past 18 years at Tung Wah Eastern Hospital and Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital. Clinical documents and operation records were reviewed.

Results: A total of 81 ethnic Chinese patients (44 male) who underwent evisceration with primary implant insertion were reviewed. 39 (48%) patients underwent the double scleral closure technique with an implant placed posterior to the posterior sclera, and 42 (52%) patients underwent the single scleral closure technique with an implant inserted in the intra-scleral cavity. The follow-up interval was 70 months. The surgical indications were endophthalmitis (35%), painful blind eye (23%), traumatic disfigured globe (22%) and phthisis bulbi (20%). Silicone was the most used implant material (69%). The patients who underwent double scleral closure had a larger size of the implant (19.7 vs 17.9 mm, p < 0.05). Both implant exposure (26% vs 3%, p < 0.05) and implant extrusion (26% vs 0%, p < 0.05) were more common in patients who underwent single scleral.

Conclusions: Double scleral closure technique allows a larger implant, and it is associated with a lower rate of implant exposure and extrusion. The double scleral closure technique is a superior technique of choice in these patients with primary implant placement.

Keywords: Double scleral closure technique; Evisceration; Optic nerve disinsertion; Orbital implant; Posterior sclerotomy.