Search

Purpose:To report 2 cases of regression of sebaceous carcinoma of the eyelid after a small incisional biopsy. Methods:Clinical, imaging, and histopathological findings are presented, with a literature review on regressing ocular tumors. Results:Our first patient was a 79-year-old man who presented with a 10-month history of progressive left upper eyelid ptosis caused by an eyelid tumor with orbital involvement and confirmed on magnetic resonance imaging. Our second patient was a 70-year-old woman who presented with ptosis with a left upper eyelid mass. Both patients underwent a small incisional biopsy of their lesion. The histopathological diagnoses in both cases were consistent with sebaceous carcinoma. Both patients refused exenteration. Follow-up clinical examination and imaging disclosed total regression of the ptosis and of the neoplasm with no sign of recurrence in both patients over a 4-year period for Case 1 and a 7-year period for Case 2. Conclusion:Regression following incisional biopsy of basal cell, squamous cell, and Merkel cell carcinoma, including of the eyelid, is well documented. To the best of our knowledge, our 2 cases of sebaceous carcinoma are the first to be reported with total involution clinically and on imaging of the tumor following partial incisional biopsy.

Background Open versus endonasal resection of orbital apex (OA) tumors is generally based on tumor size, location, and pathology. For endonasal resection, two- and four-handed techniques have been reported, but whether one technique is more optimal based on these tumor features has not been evaluated.Objective To determine whether two- versus four-handed techniques result in better outcomes after endoscopic resection of OA tumors, and whether either technique is better suited for intra- versus extraconal location and for benign versus malignant pathology.Methods A retrospective review of all expanded endonasal approaches for OA tumors was performed at a single institution from 2009 to 2013. A PubMed database search was also performed to review series published on endonasal OA tumor resection. Across all the cases reviewed, the following data were recorded: two- versus four-handed techniques, intra- versus extraconal tumor location, and benign versus malignant pathology. The relationship between these variables and resection extent was analyzed by the Fisher exact test. Postoperative visual status and complications were also reviewed.Results Ten cases from the institution and 94 cases from 17 publications were reviewed. Both two- and four-handed techniques were used to resect extra-and intraconal OA tumors, for both benign and malignant pathology. Four-handed techniques included a purely endonasal approach and a combined endonasal-orbital approach. On univariate analysis, the strongest predictor of complete resection was benign pathology (p = 0.005). No significant difference was found between the extent of resection and a two- versus a four-handed technique. Visual status was improved or unchanged in 94% of cases, and other complications were rare.Conclusion Benign tumors that involve the medial extraconal and posterior inferomedial intraconal OA can be treated by either two- or four-handed endonasal techniques. Selecting two- versus four-handed techniques and endonasal versus endonasal-orbital four-handed techniques depends mainly on surgeons’ experience. Endonasal approaches for malignant OA tumors are less likely to result in complete resection.