2006
DOI: 10.1590/s0004-27492006000500025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intralenticular metal foreign body: case report

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[12] We reviewed 28 previously reported cases of intralenticular FB, the clinical features and treatment outcomes of which are summarized in Table 1. [3456789101112131415161718] The mean age at injury was 30 years; nearly all patients were male (27/28); most FBs were metallic (20/28). The cornea was the most frequent FB entry site (24/28), although sclera (2/28) and limbus (1/28) were also reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[12] We reviewed 28 previously reported cases of intralenticular FB, the clinical features and treatment outcomes of which are summarized in Table 1. [3456789101112131415161718] The mean age at injury was 30 years; nearly all patients were male (27/28); most FBs were metallic (20/28). The cornea was the most frequent FB entry site (24/28), although sclera (2/28) and limbus (1/28) were also reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other indications for surgery included anterior uveitis, glaucoma, lens subluxation, and ocular siderosis. [3456789101112131415161718] Four cases, described as follows, received surgery prior to any ocular complications developing: copper-containing FB that might have incited devastating inflammation; organic FB with a high risk of infection; patient drove heavy goods vehicles for which good vision was required; and patient's location was too far from the hospital preventing regular follow-ups. When making decisions regarding surgery, factors including FB characteristics, infection possibility, ocular complications, associated injuries, and patient's personal considerations were all assessed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…IOFBs following penetrating eye injury are common in most clinical cases, which can cause severe complications such as cataract, glaucoma, uveitis, retinal detachment, and endophthalmitis [ 6 ]. Intralenticular foreign bodies comprised only 5–10 % of all IOFBs [ 2 , 3 ]. The treatment management and outcome depend on several factors such as size, location, material type, risk of infection, and other intraocular damage [ 7 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs), with an incidence of about 18–41 % [ 1 ], are commonly encountered in cases of penetrating ocular trauma. However, the lens is not commonly involved, and the incidence of intralenticular foreign bodies is only 5–10 % [ 2 , 3 ]. Accurate localization of IOFBs is essential to evaluate the severity of the ocular lesion and to determine further management.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[15] Intralenticular foreign bodies comprised only 5-10 % of all IOFBs. [16,17] The incidence of infectious endophthalmitis after retaining an IOFB has been reported to be 0-13.5%. [18] Several studies have shown that delayed removal of IOFB may end with poor visual and anatomical outcomes including the development of infectious endophthalmitis and retinal detachment.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%