Naevi or not nevi? Now that's a question

  View PDF

THIS ARTICLE IS BEST READ ON A PDF.

Irrespective of how one arrives at the correct spelling, one of my most feared fundus findings is that of presumed naevi (nevi).

Days and nights trawling through Kanski as an undergraduate did not prepare me for what I was about to see. No amount of understanding that choroidal melanin was brownish in colour as compared to the retinal pigment epithelium which is black helped. Could I really say with 100 per cent confidence the lesion was flat, with a greyish appearance and a less demarcated edge than of a retinal lesion such as a congenital hypertrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium (CHRPE)? 

Did geographic patches of orange pigment overlying the naevi represent an early sign of a malignant transformation?

Generally, the fields showed nothing, and dilation with binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy helped little in differentiation.   Usually, erring on the side of caution, I referred, often using such vague phrases as 'routine examination' 'not seen at previous examination', 'flat brown pigmented lesion', 'an immediate referral re-presumed naevus'.

Above are two images (Figures 1 and 2) - what would you do?

Patient A: age 70+ reports for 12-month examination. The lesion had not been seen before despite five previous visits.
Patient B: age 51 with a  previous history of skin cancer. Presented for second opinion as couldn't see through progressive power lenses. I referred both.