1997
DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)71132-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A System for Classifying Mechanical Injuries of the Eye (Globe)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
393
0
18

Year Published

2001
2001
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 588 publications
(428 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
10
393
0
18
Order By: Relevance
“…We were therefore unable to grade the severity of the injury according to the Ocular Trauma Classification Group (OTCG) terminology 14 and instead we used the simpler classification of Kuhn et al 10 Children with OGI had significantly more lens injury than those with CGI (64.3 vs 6.1%, Po0.0001). This may suggest that OGI is more likely to cause damage to the lens or zonules, but in this selected series may also imply that lens injury after OGI is more likely to require vitreoretinal management than after CGI.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We were therefore unable to grade the severity of the injury according to the Ocular Trauma Classification Group (OTCG) terminology 14 and instead we used the simpler classification of Kuhn et al 10 Children with OGI had significantly more lens injury than those with CGI (64.3 vs 6.1%, Po0.0001). This may suggest that OGI is more likely to cause damage to the lens or zonules, but in this selected series may also imply that lens injury after OGI is more likely to require vitreoretinal management than after CGI.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Penetrating eye injuries were defined according to the Birmingham Eye Trauma Terminology system of Kuhn et al 15 The location and severity of the injury were assessed pursuant to the Ocular Trauma Classification Group guidelines. 16 In addition, we distinguished between central and peripheral corneal lacerations as we have previously observed a difference in terms of the visual outcome (personal experience).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A classificação proposta por Pieramici et al 7 foi utilizada pois sua finalidade é uniformizar a linguagem e as classificações permitindo assim a comparação dos dados entre os diferentes centros de pesquisa. Foram excluídos deste estudo os pacientes que apresentavam como classificação tipo B, C e D (laceração, corpo estranho e associação respectivamente) pois estes tipos apresentam repercussões e prognósticos diferentes dos traumatismos fechados com contusão.…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Os pacientes foram classificados de acordo com o proposto por Pieramici et al 7 : grau 1, 2, 3, 4 ou 5 de acordo com acuidade visual e zona I, II ou III, de acordo com a região mais posterior do olho acometida (Quadro 1). O hifema foi classificado em graus de forma quantitativa 8 e a recessão angular em graus de acordo a extensão.…”
Section: Métodosunclassified