This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:82-85.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The differential diagnosis of malignant melanoma of the uveal tract continues to challenge clinicians. In recent decades, we have come to expect a 95% or better accuracy in the clinical diagnosis of malignant melanoma, and in some centers such as the Wills Eye Institute, Baltimore, Md,¹ and the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn,² 96.3% and 97.7% accuracies, respectively, have been reported. In 1990, a North American prospective randomized multicenter study group, the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study (COMS) Group, reported a 99.5% accuracy in the diagnosis of choroidal melanoma.³ By 1998, the COMS had enrolled more than 2300 eyes into the study, and among the 1532 eyes randomized and enucleated, 1527 were found to have a choroidal melanoma, resulting in a diagnostic accuracy of 99.67%.^4-6 The 5 misdiagnosed cases included 4 adenocarcinomas that metastasized to the choroid and 1 choroidal hemangioma. The low misdiagnosis rate in the COMS is a reflection of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Report of a Case


Comment
Corresponding author and reprints: Dennis M. Robertson, MD, Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (e-mail: robertson.dennis@mayo.edu)

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Size Overlap between Benign Melanocytic Choroidal Nevi and Choroidal Malignant Melanomas
Augsburger et al.
IOVS 2008;49:2823-2828.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT