ArticleEye (London, England)2026
The prevalence of unsuspected intraocular malignancy following eye removal.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe prevalence of incidental intraocular malignancy in eye removal cases due to phthisis bulbi remains poorly understood. This retrospective study evaluates the prevalence of unsuspected intraocular malignancies in eye removal specimens.
methodsRetrospective study of 1897 evisceration and enucleation specimens submitted for histopathological examination in the UK between 2014 and 2023 submitted to Department of Eye Pathology (DEP), a laboratory within the National Specialist Ophthalmic Pathology Service (NSOPS).
resultsAmong 664 cases meeting inclusion criteria, the incidence of unsuspected malignancy was 0.75% (n = 5). All cases involved evisceration, with malignancies including melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma in situ, and undifferentiated spindle cell tumours, involving one case of malignancy of a corneal button. One case changed to suspected malignancy intraoperatively due to the findings noted during evisceration. Preoperative clinical assessments, including B-scan ultrasonography, failed to detect malignancies in these cases, highlighting the importance of comprehensive preoperative evaluation.
conclusionThese findings underscore the need for histological examination in end-stage eyes to identify hidden malignancies and inform treatment decisions. While the overall risk of unsuspected intraocular malignancy remains low, this study reinforces the necessity of considering enucleation when intraocular tumours cannot be reliably excluded preoperatively. This data also emphasises the importance of informed consent and shared decision-making, incorporating the small but material risk of malignancy into pre-operative discussions with patients.
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.