[Does orbital exenteration still has a place in 2019?].

INTRODUCTION

Orbital exenteration is a radical anatomically and psychologically disfiguring procedure. It is mostly performed for management of orbital cancers or cancers with orbital involvement. The lack of benefit in terms of overall survival and the development of new molecular therapies (targeted therapies, immunotherapy) in recent years leads us to question its use. The goal of our review is to answer to the following question: is orbital exenteration a viable procedure in 2019?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed using the PUBMED and MEDLINE databases. The following terms were used then crossed with each other: "orbital exenteration", "exenterated socket", "overall survival", "life expectancy", "orbital reconstruction", "socket reconstruction". Oncology articles from the past 15 years were included and separated into those in the oculoplastic literature and those in the ENT literature.

RESULTS

Nineteen articles were included in this review. Eyelid tumours represent the main etiology of orbital exenteration. Basal cell carcinoma is the most frequently incriminated tumor, while sebaceous carcinoma and conjunctival squamous cell carcinoma are the most frequently encountered in Asian series. Non-conservative orbital exenteration is the most prevalent surgery performed. Orbital reconstruction depends on the surgeon's speciality: healing by secondary intention and split thickness skin grafts are mostly performed by oculoplastic surgeons, whereas regional or free flaps are mostly performed by ENT surgeons. Cerebrospinal fluid leakage is the most common intraoperative complication, encountered in 0 to 13 % of cases. The most common postoperative complications are ethmoid fistula and infection of the operative site, encountered in 0 to 50 % and 0 to 43 % of cases respectively. Orbital exenteration allows surgical resection of R0 tumors in 42.5 % to 97 % of cases. Overall survival following orbital exenteration is 83 % (50.5-97) and 65 % (37-92) at 1 and 5 years respectively. Identified risk factors for poor overall survival are: age, tumor histology (worse prognosis with choroidal melanoma, better prognosis with basal cell carcinoma), non-R0 surgical resection, locally advanced tumors (size>20mm, BCVA<20/400 and the presence of metastases at diagnosis). Recent studies have demonstrated favorable outcomes when managing locally advanced basal cell carcinoma, lacrimal gland cancer and conjunctival melanoma with targeted therapies or immunotherapies without performing orbital exenteration.

CONCLUSION

Orbital exenteration remains a major part of our therapeutic arsenal. Although orbital exenteration has failed to demonstrate any overall survival benefit, it allows satisfactory local control of the disease with an increasingly less invasive procedure. The development of targeted therapies and immunotherapies may change our therapeutic decisions in the future.