Correlation of B-scan, CT scan and biopsy findings in orbital masses (space occupying lesions)

  • Dr. Modini Pandarpurkar Professor and HOD, Department of Ophthalmology, Sarojinidevi Eye Hospital, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
  • Dr G.V. Shilpa Assistant Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, Sarojinidevi Eye Hospital, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
  • Dr. K.S. Amruthavalli Senior Resident, Department of Ophthalmology, Sarojinidevi Eye Hospital, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
  • Dr N. Rajesh Kumar Junior Resident, Department of Ophthalmology, Sarojinidevi Eye Hospital, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Keywords: Orbital masses, Orbital mass biopsy, B-Scan, CT Scan, Benign, Malignant orbital lesions

Abstract

Introduction: Orbital masses or space occupying lesions, involving the orbit, produce symptoms and signs by compression, infiltration and/or infarction of orbital structures. A wide variety of processes can produce space-occupying lesions in and around the orbit. Imaging can be done to precisely localize a lesion, to help establish a diagnosis or generate a differential diagnosis that guides management.

Material and Methods: Over a period of 18 months, patients with space occupying lesion of the orbit, in the age group of 1 to 70 years are included in the study. Proptosis assessment was done.

Results: All the patients were subjected to B scan, CT scan and biopsy. On comparing the findings of B-Scan, CT Scan and biopsy (biopsy findings being taken as gold standard), B-Scan accurately diagnosed 83.33% of the cases, where as CT scan diagnosed only 60% of the cases accurately. Rest of the cases, there was no correlation between the B-Scan/CT scan and biopsy.

Conclusions: B-Scan appears to be the better diagnosing tool in identifying most of the orbital lesions when compared to the CT scan. Considering radiation exposure, repeated examination, cost effectiveness and time consumption, B-Scan is advantageous over CT scan in the initial work up and follow up of cases.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Mallajosyula S, Surgical atlas of orbital diseases. 1st ed. Jaypee Brothers Med Publ LTD. 2006;104-108.

Khan SN, Sepahdari AR. Orbital masses: CT and MRI of common vascular lesions, benign tumors, and malignancies. Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2012;26(4):373-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjopt.2012.08.001.

Southern S. Ultrasound of the eye. Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2009;12(1):32-37. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2205-0140.2009.tb00005.x. Epub 2015 Dec 31.

Naik MN, Tourani KL, Sekhar GC, Honavar SG. Interpretation of computed tomography imaging of the eye and orbit. A systematic approach. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2002;50(4):339-353.

Bran A, Tripati R, Tripati B. Wolfs anatomy of the eye and the orbit, 8th edition. Chapman & Hall India,1997, page 11-23.

De La Hoz Polo M, Torramilans Lluís A, Pozuelo Segura O, Anguera Bosque A, Esmerado Appiani C, Caminal Mitjana JM. Ocular ultrasonography focused on the posterior eye segment: what radiologists should know. Insights Imaging. 2016;7(3):351-64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-016-0471-z. Epub 2016 Feb 24.

Choudary N, Verma SR, Gupta PK, Sharma S, Awana A. Evaluation of orbital and ocular lesions on sonography. IOSR J Dental Med Sci. 2017;16(6):50-58. doi: https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-1606015058.

Ukponmwan CU, Marchien TT. Ultrasonic diagnosis of orbito-ocular diseases in Benin City, Nigeria. The Nigerian postgraduate Med J. 2001;8(3):123-126.

Hafiz MA, Mustansar MW. Ultrasound of the eye and orbit. Can J Med. 2011;2(1):39.

Glasier CM, Brodsky MC, Leithiser RE Jr, Williamson SL, Seibert JJ. High resolution ultrasound with Doppler: a diagnostic adjunct in orbital and ocular lesions in children. Pediatr Radiol. 1992;22(3):174-178. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02012488.

Scott IU, Smiddy WE, Feuer WJ, Ehlies FJ. The impact of echography on evaluation and management of posterior segment disorders. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;137(1):24-29. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(03)00910-3.

Itani KM, Frueh B, Nelson C. The value of orbital echography in orbital practice. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;14(6):432-435. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/00002341-199811000-00007.

Nagaraju RM, Gurushankar G, Bhimarao3, Kadakola B. Efficacy of High Frequency Ultrasound in Localization and Characterization of Orbital Lesions. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(9):TC01-TC06. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.7860%2FJCDR%2F2015%2F13021.6428. Epub 2015 Sep 1.

Sambasivarao K, Ushalatha B. Diagnostic role of CT in the evaluation of proptosis. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2015;14(4):25-31. doi: 10.9790/0853-14492531.

Akinmoladun JA, Adeyinka AO, UchenduandO, Akinmoladun. Evaluation of the effectiveness of computed tomography in the diagnosis of orbital tumors in Ibadan, Nigeria, J West AfrColl Surg. 2013;3(3):46-62.

CITATION
DOI: 10.17511/jooo.2019.i08.02
Published: 2019-12-18
How to Cite
Pandarpurkar, M., G.V., S., Amruthavalli, K., & Kumar N., R. (2019). Correlation of B-scan, CT scan and biopsy findings in orbital masses (space occupying lesions). Tropical Journal of Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology, 4(8), 457-462. https://doi.org/10.17511/jooo.2019.i08.02
Section
Original Article