BMC Ophthalmology (Jul 2022)

Ruthenium-106 plaque radiotherapy for uveal melanoma: analysis of tumor dimension and location on anatomical and functional results

  • Reza Mirshahi,
  • Ahad Sedaghat,
  • Ramin Jaberi,
  • Zohreh Azma,
  • Mehdi Mazloumi,
  • Masood Naseripour

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02521-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 22, no. 1
pp. 1 – 10

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background To report the long-term outcomes of Ru-106 plaque radiotherapy in eyes with uveal melanoma (UM) and to assess the effect of tumor thickness and location on final outcomes. Methods Medical records of 234 patients undergoing Ru-106 plaque radiotherapy for UM were reviewed, and the visual outcome, globe preservation, and patient survival were evaluated. The results of 2 groups were compared: 1. between thin (small and medium-sized, thickness 12 mm, 109 eyes [46.6%]) and medium/small (LBD ≤ 12 mm, 125 eyes [53.4%]). In addition, a comparison of the juxtapapillary location in 46 eyes (19.7%) versus tumors arising elsewhere and between tumors with and without ciliary involvement in 48 eyes (21.5%) were done. Results The patients were followed for a median of 54.2 months (range: 6–194.5 months). After adjusting for baseline visual acuity (VA), there was no significant association between final VA and different dimension and tumor location groups. Final globe preservation was 91.9%, and there was no significant difference between different dimension- and ciliary body involvement groups regarding anatomical success rate. The juxtapapillary tumors had lower globe preservation (80.4% vs .94.7%, p = 0.002). The hazard ratio (HR) for enucleation in juxtapapillary tumors was HR = 6.58 (95-CI: 3.84 to 11.21). The overall metastasis rate was 6.8%, with no significant difference in juxtapapillary tumors (4.3% vs.7.4%, p = 0.455). Conclusions Ru-106 plaque radiotherapy is an effective treatment for thick and large UM. With this type of treatment, the globe preservation rate is lower in juxtapapillary tumors, but there is no significant difference in the metastasis rate.

Keywords