Lens injury in setting of Zone I and II open globe injuries.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-23 DOI:10.4103/IJO.IJO_986_24
Brian W Chou, Shu Feng, Leona Ding, Raghu C Mudumbai
{"title":"Lens injury in setting of Zone I and II open globe injuries.","authors":"Brian W Chou, Shu Feng, Leona Ding, Raghu C Mudumbai","doi":"10.4103/IJO.IJO_986_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To characterize visual outcomes in Zone I and II open globe injuries with lens involvement.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Level 1 Trauma Center Hospital, Seattle WA.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective case series.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Zone I and II open globe injuries between May 2009 and May 2018 were reviewed for lens involvement, demographic data, injury characteristics, associated ocular comorbidities, surgical details, and visual outcomes. Eyes with nontraumatic or surgical injuries, prior penetrating keratoplasty, or a history of cataract extraction were excluded. Visual outcomes were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's exact tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 145 Zone I and II globe injuries (63 without lens injury and 82 with lens injury) with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Endophthalmitis was not identified in any patients without lens involvement, while 9 patients with lens injury (11%) developed endophthalmitis. Patients with lens injury demonstrated a more severe ocular trauma score (P = 0.003). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was significantly better (P = 0.03) in patients without lens injury compared to those with lens injury. The median (interquartile range) BCVA in the no-lens injury group was 20/40 (20/25 - 20/400), while in the lens injury group it was 20/80 (20/40-20/300). The location of intraocular lens (IOL) placement did not influence final visual acuity outcomes (P = 0.76). However, eyes left aphakic had worse BCVA compared to those that received a secondary IOL (P = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Open globe injuries with lens involvement are associated with worse visual prognosis. An increased rate of endophthalmitis may contribute to this difference. In eyes requiring secondary IOL placement, the location of the IOL did not affect final BCVA.</p>","PeriodicalId":13329,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"73 1","pages":"59-63"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/IJO.IJO_986_24","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To characterize visual outcomes in Zone I and II open globe injuries with lens involvement.

Setting: Level 1 Trauma Center Hospital, Seattle WA.

Design: Retrospective case series.

Methods: Zone I and II open globe injuries between May 2009 and May 2018 were reviewed for lens involvement, demographic data, injury characteristics, associated ocular comorbidities, surgical details, and visual outcomes. Eyes with nontraumatic or surgical injuries, prior penetrating keratoplasty, or a history of cataract extraction were excluded. Visual outcomes were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's exact tests.

Results: A total of 145 Zone I and II globe injuries (63 without lens injury and 82 with lens injury) with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Endophthalmitis was not identified in any patients without lens involvement, while 9 patients with lens injury (11%) developed endophthalmitis. Patients with lens injury demonstrated a more severe ocular trauma score (P = 0.003). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was significantly better (P = 0.03) in patients without lens injury compared to those with lens injury. The median (interquartile range) BCVA in the no-lens injury group was 20/40 (20/25 - 20/400), while in the lens injury group it was 20/80 (20/40-20/300). The location of intraocular lens (IOL) placement did not influence final visual acuity outcomes (P = 0.76). However, eyes left aphakic had worse BCVA compared to those that received a secondary IOL (P = 0.005).

Conclusions: Open globe injuries with lens involvement are associated with worse visual prognosis. An increased rate of endophthalmitis may contribute to this difference. In eyes requiring secondary IOL placement, the location of the IOL did not affect final BCVA.

晶状体损伤在I区和II区开放性球损伤背景下的应用。
目的:描述晶状体受累的I区和II区开放性眼球损伤的视力结果。地点:华盛顿州西雅图市一级创伤中心医院。设计:回顾性病例系列。方法:回顾2009年5月至2018年5月期间的I区和II区开放眼球损伤,包括晶状体受损伤、人口统计学数据、损伤特征、相关眼部合并症、手术细节和视力结果。非外伤性或外科损伤、既往穿透性角膜移植术或白内障摘除史的眼睛被排除在外。使用Kruskal-Wallis和Fisher精确测试比较视觉结果。结果:共纳入I区和II区眼球损伤145例(无晶状体损伤63例,晶状体损伤82例),随访至少6个月。未累及晶状体的患者未发现眼内炎,而晶状体损伤的患者中有9例(11%)出现眼内炎。晶状体损伤患者的眼外伤评分更严重(P = 0.003)。无晶状体损伤患者的最佳矫正视力(BCVA)明显优于晶状体损伤患者(P = 0.03)。无晶状体损伤组中位BCVA为20/40(20/25 ~ 20/400),晶状体损伤组中位BCVA为20/80(20/40 ~ 20/300)。人工晶状体(IOL)的放置位置不影响最终的视力结果(P = 0.76)。然而,与接受二次IOL的患者相比,无晶状体眼的BCVA更差(P = 0.005)。结论:晶状体受累的开放性眼球损伤与较差的视力预后相关。眼内炎发病率的增加可能是造成这种差异的原因。在需要二次人工晶状体植入的眼睛中,人工晶状体的位置不影响最终的BCVA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
19.40%
发文量
1963
审稿时长
38 weeks
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Ophthalmology covers clinical, experimental, basic science research and translational research studies related to medical, ethical and social issues in field of ophthalmology and vision science. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信