Superficial corneal foreign body: laboratory and epidemiologic aspects

Filho, Ednajar Tavares Macedo; Lago, Aline do; Duarte, Karine; Liang, Shih Jung; Lima, A. F.; Freitas, Denise de

doi:10.1590/s0004-27492005000600019

Cited by 26 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A CASFB can cause both corneal and intraocular infection . Surprisingly, only 4% of cases developed macroscopic corneal inflammatory infiltrate and keratomalacia at the penetration site, with only two cases requiring surgical treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corneal and anterior segment foreign body trauma in dogs: a review of 218 cases

Pont

Riera

Newton

et al. 2015

Veterinary Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…No FBs were sent for bacterial and fungal culture. In one study in humans, positive corneal FB culture was achieved in 32.7% of cases, with the most commonly isolated microorganisms being α‐hemolytic Streptococcus spp. and Staphylococcus aureus .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corneal and anterior segment foreign body trauma in dogs: a review of 218 cases

Pont

Riera

Newton

et al. 2015

Veterinary Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As vegetative foreign material is not typically inert, but rather promotes a significant inflammatory reaction, prompt removal is recommended . Furthermore, vegetative foreign material embedded within the ocular surface is a risk factor for the development of secondary microbial infection (fungal and/or bacterial) in both humans and companion animals . With consideration to these factors, surgical extraction of all foreign material was recommended for all cases in this series.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cactus‐induced keratoconjunctivitis in Texas: A case series of three dogs and one cat

Dowler

Scott

Teixeira

et al. 2019

Veterinary Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To describe the historical, clinical, and diagnostic features of small animal patients affected by cactus‐induced keratoconjunctivitis and their response to therapy. Animals studied Three dogs and one cat. Procedures Ophthalmic examination directed subsequent selected diagnostic tests in each case including light microscopy of extracted foreign bodies, in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM), corneal histopathology, and corneal bacterial culture. Treatments consisted of foreign body surgical extraction with concurrent medical therapy (three cases), or medical therapy alone (one case). Results Clinical histories obtained supported acute cactus injury in all cases. Ophthalmic abnormalities were unilateral in each case and included ulcerative keratoconjunctivitis associated with linear, microscopic conjunctival and/or corneal penetrating cactus spines, known as glochids. Light microscopy and IVCM showed glochids to be heavily barbed, consistent with the spine morphology Prickly Pear (Opuntia) cactus species. Bacterial culture yielded Proprionicimonas sp. in one case with keratomalacia. Surgical extraction of spines was challenging, and residual conjunctival and/or corneal glochids were present in all cases. Patient discomfort resolved at a median of 21 days (range 10‐51 days). Vision‐threatening complications were not observed in any case at the time of last follow‐up examination. Epithelial downgrowth, demonstrated by IVCM and histopathology, was present in one case at 108‐day follow‐up. Conclusions Cactus‐induced keratoconjunctivitis should be considered as a differential in regions in which Opuntia cacti are prevalent, and microscopic ocular foreign bodies are observed. Although glochids are difficult to extract, positive clinical outcomes can occur in small animal patients despite the presence of residual organic corneal foreign material.

show abstract

“…As observed in the horses of the present report, the inflammatory response of the cornea to foreign material can vary dramatically between cases. Differences in material composition and antigenicity, biochemical reactions occurring within the tissue, microbial contamination, and the presence of venom or other noxious substances may all contribute to the variable biological reactions observed with corneal foreign bodies . Due to the unpredictable response of the cornea to foreign materials, removal is advised when clinically feasible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%