Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42665844›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2026

Misdiagnosis of uveal melanoma and other intraocular malignancies in enucleated eyes: a 28-year national review.

Hans Witzenhausen, Katerina Stripling, Gustav Stålhammar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hans Witzenhausen *Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Eye and Vision, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Katerina Stripling *Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Eye and Vision, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Gustav StålhammarDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Eye and Vision, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. gustav.stalhammar@ki.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9401-8911

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraocular tumors are often diagnosed clinically rather than by biopsy, so a benign lesion can be mistaken for malignancy and lead to enucleation. We determined how often uveal melanoma (UM) and other intraocular tumors are clinically misdiagnosed among enucleated eyes at the Swedish national ophthalmic pathology laboratory over 28 years, and the lesions responsible.

methodsIn this retrospective, registry-based case series, all enucleation specimens accessioned at the St. Erik Ophthalmic Pathology Laboratory, Stockholm, between 1995 and 2022 under a clinical diagnosis of malignancy were reviewed against pathology reports, referral letters, and clinical records. Predefined criteria identified eyes in which a malignant tumor drove enucleation but was not confirmed histopathologically. In an exploratory analysis, the authors rated the projected visual acuity had enucleation been deferred. The misdiagnosis rate was modeled against calendar year by logistic regression and tested in sensitivity analyses.

resultsOf 24,242 specimens, 1,661 were enucleations, and after predefined exclusions, 1,419 eyes had been enucleated for a presumed tumor. Thirty-nine (2.7%) were misdiagnoses: 21 diagnosed as UM, 11 with another suspected neoplasm, and 7 with a suspected unspecified malignancy. Intraocular hemorrhage was the lesion most often mistaken for UM. Among the 21 μm eyes, the projected visual impact of enucleation was nil in 13 that had no useful vision at enucleation, a loss of useful vision in 1 (decimal acuity 0.25, a benign leiomyoma), and not estimable in 7. The misdiagnosis rate did not change appreciably (odds ratio 0.97 per year, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.01, P = 0.16), remained between 2.3% and 4.2% in sensitivity analyses, and did not differ between 1995 and 2010 (2.8%) and 2011-2022 (1.8%; P = 0.25). Misdiagnosed eyes were almost always blind, painful, or had opaque media, where clinical and imaging assessment is least reliable.

conclusionsClinical misdiagnosis preceded 2.7% of tumor-related enucleations over 28 years, at a stable rate, and intraocular hemorrhage was the most frequent mimic of UM. In an exploratory projection based on incomplete records, misdiagnosis seldom appeared to sacrifice useful vision. The findings reinforce the value of multimodal imaging, ocular-oncology consultation, and consideration of biopsy before enucleation when the diagnosis is uncertain.

Indexed as

Diagnostic errorEnucleationOphthalmic pathologyPseudomelanomaUveal melanoma

Identifiers

PMID42665844
PMCPMC13523422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.