ReviewTaiwan journal of ophthalmology
Surgical treatment of uveal melanoma: Exoresection versus endoresection.
Review in Taiwan journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Endoresection in Choroidal Melanoma: Outcomes of Intentional Incomplete Tumor Removal.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Observational
- Toward Precision Medicine: Gene Therapy Applications in the Management of Uveal Melanoma.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Ocular oncology: Rare and amazing.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uveal melanoma, the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults, presents significant therapeutic challenges. With the advancement of surgical instruments and techniques, exoresection (ab-externo) and endoresection (ab-interno) have emerged as viable treatment methods. These surgical interventions can be implemented particularly for tumors exceeding traditional size criteria for plaque brachytherapy and for tumors that are too large, which pose an elevated risk of radiation-related complications. Moreover, surgical interventions not only enhance the potential for functional vision preservation and globe retention but also provide effective control of intraocular tumors and metastatic disease when combined with adjunctive radiation therapy. Exoresection, an external approach, involves dissection and removal of the tumor through a scleral flap, while endoresection utilizes vitreoretinal surgical techniques for internal tumor excision. Both surgical techniques for uveal melanoma removal are highly challenging, carry significant risks of complications, and should be performed by experienced vitreoretinal surgeons specializing in ocular oncology at specialized centers. They aim to preserve the eye and potentially maintain useful vision while saving patients' lives, a crucial consideration in ocular oncology. These surgical modalities have become increasingly relevant as the field progresses towards more conservative, function-preserving approaches in cancer treatment. The aim of this article is to conduct a comparative analysis of exoresection and endoresection in the context of uveal melanoma management. By critically evaluating these surgical modalities, this review seeks to provide clinicians with valuable insights to guide treatment decisions for patients with large uveal melanomas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.