ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Orbital Imaging and Vision Loss-Child
Expert Panel on Pediatric Imaging,Mohit Maheshwari,Mai-Lan Ho,Thangamadhan Bosemani,Hisham Dahmoush,Douglas Fredrick,Carolina V Guimaraes,Edwin Gulko,Camilo Jaimes,Madeline M Joseph,Summer L Kaplan,R Christopher Miyamoto,Helen R Nadel,Sonia Partap,Cory M Pfeifer,Sumit Pruthi
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2024.02.023
Abstract:Orbital disorders in children consist of varied pathologies affecting the orbits, orbital contents, visual pathway, and innervation of the extraocular or intraocular muscles. The underlying etiology of these disorders may be traumatic or nontraumatic. Presumed location of the lesion along with the additional findings, such as eye pain, swelling, exophthalmos/enophthalmos, erythema, conjunctival vascular dilatation, intraocular pressure, etc, help in determining if imaging is needed, modality of choice, and extent of coverage (orbits and/or head). Occasionally, clinical signs and symptoms may be nonspecific, and, in these cases, diagnostic imaging studies play a key role in depicting the nature and extent of the injury or disease. In this document, various clinical scenarios are discussed by which a child may present with an orbital or vision abnormality. Imaging studies that might be most appropriate (based on the best available evidence or expert consensus) in these clinical scenarios are also discussed. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.