الفهرس 
Anatomy
BASELINE SYSTEMIC EVALUATIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 142 |  |  |
| | | from | 142 | | |
Abstract
Enucleation has been the standard treatment for intra ocular tumors. However, concerns about enucleation, especially possible tumor spread caused by manipulation of the eye during surgery, plus vision loss and the poor cosmetic outcome; have made clinical advances focusing on intraocular tumor control enabling increased globe conservation while minimizing the risk to the patient which introduce irradiation therapy as a popular alternative.
Most commonly used form of radiation therapy is ophthalmic plaque brachytherapy. This is because it is the most conformal; it concentrates the radiation within the targeted zone (the tumor) and reduces the amount of energy delivered to normal structures. Plaque has been shown to be effective, cheap and extremely flexible as plaques can deal with almost all clinical situations.
The three radioactive isotopes currently most widely used in ocular oncology are RU 106(which was used in this current study),I 125, and Pd103.
Ru plaques emit beta particles that travel a relatively short distance in tissue. Therefore, Ru plaques have both minimal side-scatter and a rapid axial DROP-off in radiation intensity.
Over the past decades a trend towards the combination of multiple focal conservative treatments in management of uveal melanoma. The COMS experience indicates that the treatment choice does not affect patient survival.
In this current study a series of eleven patients with primary malignant intraocular tumors (eight cases of uveal melanoma and three cases of RB); all patients treated with plaque brachytherapy with a mean dose of 8591.0 cGy and mean dose rate of 83 cGy/hour. Six of the patients received additional treatment after plaque.
Comparison between patients treated with plaque only and the other group that received additional treatment was done in attempt to discover the requirement of additional therapy after plaque radiation therapy.
The results showed significant difference in tumor height reduction between the 2 study groups after treatment in favor of the group that received additional treatment while there was no significant value prior to treatment.
The study results show significant difference in the reduction in tumor base after treatment in favor of the group that received additional treatment.
The results showed that there is no significant difference between the two study groups in the requirement of secondary enucleation.
Although this study results favors addition of a therapy to plaque, the number of subjects in this study was relatively small. Further studies with longer follow up are needed to evaluate the stability of the tumor following plaque treatment with or without additional therapy