Intraocular Lenses Generate Chemotactic Activity in Human Serum

Ma, Galin; Im, Goldstein; Tuberville, Audrey W.; Hd, Perez; Kaplan, Howard B.

doi:10.1001/archopht.1981.03930020308023

Cited by 21 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Surgical trauma with breakdown of the blood-aqueous barrier may be a factor (Sanders et al 1982). The IOL may contribute to the inflammatory response due to a foreign body reaction (Wolter 1985), or activation of the complement system (Galin et al 1981). Furthermore, cortical remnants (Goodman et al 1989) or lens epithelial cells (Nishi 1988) may induce an inflammatory response.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for an inflammatory response after extracapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber IOL

Drolsum

Davanger

Haaskjold

1994

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk factors for developing an inflammatory response after extracapsular cataract extraction with implantation of posterior chamber IOL have been studied. Out of 1154 cases included in the study, an inflammatory response was encountered in 63 eyes (5.5%). The inflammatory response was defined as increased cellular flare and/or as a fibrinous reaction during a follow-up of 4 months. Thirteen of the 63 eyes (20.6%) developed cellular precipitates, and posterior synechias were seen in 34 of these eyes (54.0%). Among 10 pre- and 10 peroperative putative risk factors analyzed in a logistic regression model, 5 variables had a statistically significant influence on the probability of developing postoperative inflammation; 1) Uveitis in history (p = 0.0001), 2) Pseudo-exfoliation syndrome (p = 0.0224), 3) Inability to obtain adequate mydriasis at the start of surgery (p < 0.0001), 4) Problems with IOL implantation (p = 0.0111) and 5) Pigment effusion during surgery (p = 0.0258).

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for an inflammatory response after extracapsular cataract extraction and posterior chamber IOL

Drolsum

Davanger

Haaskjold

1994

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][8][9][10][11][12]. Notwithstanding the sterile conditions during implantation, the released toxic components cause inflammation in the long run, so that these synthetic materials are in fact not, or not completely, biocompatible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

(An)aerobic bacteria found in secondary-cataract material

Kalicharan

Jongebloed

Los³

et al. 1992

Doc Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Twenty four patients, who had marked reduction of vision due to secondary-cataract developed after an ECCE, were treated by surgical cleaning of the posterior lens capsule. During this procedure globular secondary-cataract material was removed and collected for morphological examination by SEM and TEM. Fragments of various sizes and shapes, including some with a 'golf ball' structure, were seen; these closely resembled particles frequently found in cataractous lenses. In addition, in 18 patients micro-organisms were found: rod-shaped bacteria, cocci, and in 2 cases yeasts. These findings were the more remarkable because these were clinically quiet eyes with no signs of intra-ocular inflammation and cultures have been persistently negative. We imagine that these bacteria must have entered the eye during the cataract extraction and have settled there without causing an infection.

show abstract

“…The water provocative test in man, rabbits, and subhuman primates (Macaca irus) has been studied with Schiotz and applanation tonometry and in combina tion with tonography and constant pressure perfusion (Swanlijung and Biodi, 1956;Galin et al, 1961Galin et al, , 1963McDonald et al, 1961;Galin, 1965;Thorpe and Kolker, 1967;Casey, 1974). The procedure has been used in rabbits to test the effects of different drugs on pressure-regulating mechanisms (McDonald et al, 1961).…”

Section: Qualitative Evaluation Of Aqueous Humor Outflow: Provocativementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is generally accepted that the increase in intraocular pressure after the administration of a substantial volume of water is primarily related to a sudden decrease in the osmolarity of the blood; the related influx of water into the eye is presumed to increase intraocular pressure proportional to the volume of water administered (Galin et al, 1961Galin, 1965). Hemodilution may not be solely responsible; in man the increase in IOP in 20% of the patients occurs before the fall in serum osmolarity (Spaeth, 1967).…”

Section: Qualitative Evaluation Of Aqueous Humor Outflow: Provocativementioning

confidence: 99%