OBJECTIVE To compare the four-petal evisceration technique and the standard evisceration technique. METHODS In this retrospective, comparative case series study, sixteen charts of patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were were reviewed. Orbital implant exposition and complication rates between the two surgical techniques were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 16 eye of 16 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis (eight in the four petal group and eight in the standard evisceration group).During postoperative follow-up there were no cases of implant exposure or migration in the four-petal group and two cases (25%) of implant exposure in the standard evisceration group.Exposed orbital implants dimension were both 16 mm and patients eviscerated for phtisis bulbiAll surgeries were uneventful, and there were no serious complications during the study. CONCLUSIONS Four petal evisceration technique seems particularly useful in patients with phtisis bulbi because it allowed the placement of an implant significantly larger than the standard technique with low rate of esposition.