Perforating Ocular Injuries*

Endophthalmitis following open-globe injuries

“…5,14 The reported incidence rate of endophthalmitis following open-globe injury ranges from 0 to 16.5% (Table 1), with evidence of a general decline over the past 70 years. 4,6,12,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] Prophylactic factors in the setting of trauma include primary wound repair within 24 h, lack of tissue prolapse into wounds and self-sealing wounds. 20 In a report from the American Trauma Registry, the incidence of endophthalmitis did not significantly differ among various types of foreign bodies.…”

“…6,12,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] (2) Delay in wound closure of 424 hFthere is a fourfold increase in the infection rate when there was a delay of 424 h. 6 (3) Injury in a rural settingFthe incidence of endophthalmitis was reported to be higher when penetrating injury occurred in a rural setting, which was attributed to a higher incidence of soil contamination.…”

Traumatic Endophthalmitis, Retinal Detachment, and Metallosis After Intraocular Foreign Body Injuries

“…6,7 Potentially blinding complications of retained IOFBs include endophthalmitis, retinal detachment and proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR), retinal toxicity in cases of metallic IOFBs, persistent ocular inflammation, glaucoma, and subretinal neovascularization. 9,11 ' Endophthalmitis Traumatic endophthalmitis occurs in 6.9% to 16.5% of injuries with retained IOFBs, 2,3,6,8,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] whereas an IOFB is reported to be present in 43% of eyes diagnosed with traumatic endophthalmitis. 9,11 ' Endophthalmitis Traumatic endophthalmitis occurs in 6.9% to 16.5% of injuries with retained IOFBs, 2,3,6,8,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] whereas an IOFB is reported to be present in 43% of eyes diagnosed wi...…”

Primary vitrectomy as a preventive surgical procedure in the treatment of severely injured eyes.

“…Examination of the series of cases presented by Moncreiff and Scheribel (1945) and by Snell (1945) shows that the number of eyes blinded or enucleated was nearly twice the number of those retaining a vision of 6/60 or better. A reversal of this overall situation is shown by the results of the more recent series of Remky et al (1967) and Watz and Reim (1973).…”