Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical presentations and surgical outcomes of intraocular foreign body presenting to an ocular trauma unit

  • Trauma
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To describe, evaluate, and identify the characteristics, prognostic factors, and visual outcomes in patients with intraocular foreign body (IOFB) in a Latin American population.

Methods

A retrospective, observational case-series of patients with a diagnosis of IOFB. Variables analyzed included age, gender, initial and final best correct visual acuity (BCVA), ocular trauma score, intraocular pressure, mechanism of injury, material and number of IOFB, zone of injury, timing of primary repair and IOFB removal, complications, and follow up.

Results

Sixty-one patients with IOFB were identified of which 97% were male with a mean age of 37.9 years (SD 2.16). The most common IOFB location was intravitreal (43%). IOFBs were metallic in 78%, vegetal in 3%, and other materials in 11%. Primary repair and secondary IOFB removal were performed at a mean timepoint of 3 days and 5 days, respectively. Systemic and topical antibiotics were administered to all patients. The initial BCVA was 1.62 logMAR and the final was 0.6 logMAR, which was statistically significant (Pearson’s chi-squared test, p value 0.01). No cases of endophthalmitis were seen.

Conclusion

IOFB removal can be delayed when there are no signs of infection or evidence of retinal detachment, without an increased risk of endophthalmitis and a negative impact on visual outcomes. Use of topical and systemic antibiotics appear sufficient to prevent endophthalmitis in these cases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yeh S, Colyer M, Weichel E (2008) Current trends in the management of intraocular foreign bodies. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19(3):225–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu C, Tong J, Li P, Li K (2016) Epidemiology and clinical outcome of intraocular foreign bodies in Hong Kong: a 13-year review. Int Ophthalmol 37(1):55–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Patel S, Langer P, Zarbin M, Bhagat N (2012) Diagnostic value of clinical examination and radiographic imaging in identification of intraocular foreign bodies in open globe injury. Eur J Ophthalmol 22(2):259–268

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Imrie F, Cox A, Foot B, MacEwen C (2007) Surveillance of intraocular foreign bodies in the UK. Eye 22(9):1141–1147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thompson J, Parver L, Enger C, Mieler W, Liggett P (1993) Infectious endophthalmitis after penetrating injuries with retained intraocular foreign bodies. Ophthalmology 100(10):1468–1474

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon C, Heimann K, Jeffers J, Treister G (1996) A standardized classification of ocular trauma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 234(6):399–403

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kuhn F, Maisiak R, Mann L, Mester V, Morris R, Witherspoon C (2002) The ocular trauma score (OTS). Ophthalmol Clin N Am 15(2):163–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pieramici D, Sternberg P, Aaberg T, Bridges W, Capone A, Cardillo J et al (1997) A system for classifying mechanical injuries of the eye (globe). Am J Ophthalmol 123(6):820–831

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Greven C, Engelbrecht N, Slusher M, Nagy S (2000) Intraocular foreign bodies. Ophthalmology 107(3):608–612

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang Y, Zhang M, Jiang C, Qiu H (2011) Intraocular foreign bodies in China: clinical characteristics, prognostic factors, and visual outcomes in 1421 eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 152(1):66–73.e1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wickham L, Xing W, Bunce C, Sullivan P (2006) Outcomes of surgery for posterior segment intraocular foreign bodies—a retrospective review of 17 years of clinical experience. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244(12):1620–1626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuhn F, Pieramici DJ (2002) Intraocular foreign bodies. In: Ferenc K, Pieramici D (eds) Ocular trauma: principles and practice. Thieme, New York, pp 235–263

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chiquet C, Zech J, Gain P, Adeleine P, Trepsat C (1998) Visual outcome and prognostic factors after magnetic extraction of posterior segment foreign bodies in 40 cases. Br J Ophthalmol 82(7):801–806

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. El-Asrar A, Al-Amro S, Khan N, Kangave D (2000) Visual outcome and prognostic factors after vitrectomy for posterior segment foreign bodies. Eur J Ophthalmol 10(4):304–311

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mansouri M, Faghihi H, Hajizadeh F, Rasoulinejad S, Rajabi M, Tabatabaey A et al (2009) Epidemiology of open-globe injuries in Iran. Retina 29(8):1141–1149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Guven S, Durukan A, Erdurman C, Kucukevcilioglu M (2018) Prognostic factors for open-globe injuries: variables for poor visual outcome. Eye 33(3):392–397

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ehlers J, Kunimoto D, Ittoop S, Maguire J, Ho A, Regillo C (2008) Metallic intraocular foreign bodies: characteristics, interventions, and prognostic factors for visual outcome and globe survival. Am J Ophthalmol 146(3):427–433.e2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. de Souza S, Howcroft MJ (1999) Management of posterior segment intraocular foreign bodies: 14 years' experience. Can J Ophthalmol 34:23–29

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Williams D, Mieler W, Abrams G, Lewis H (1988) Results and prognostic factors in penetrating ocular injuries with retained intraocular foreign Bo-dies. Ophthalmology 95(7):911–916

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wani V, Al-Ajmi M, Thalib L, Azad R, Abul M, Al-Ghanim M, Sabti K (2003) Vitrectomy for posterior segment intraocular foreign bodies. Retina 23(5):654–660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Colyer M, Weber E, Weichel E, Dick J, Bower K, Ward T, Haller J (2007) De-layed intraocular foreign body removal without endophthalmitis during operations Iraqi freedom and enduring freedom. Ophthalmology 114(8):1439–1447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chaudhry I, Shamsi F, Al-Harthi E, Al-Theeb A, Elzaridi E, Riley F (2007) Incidence and visual outcome of endophthalmitis associated with intraocular foreign bodies. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 246(2):181–186

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Punnonen E, Laatikainen L (1989) Prognosis of perforating eye injuries with intraocular foreign bodies. Acta Ophthalmol 67(5):483–491

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hadden O, Wilson J (1990) The management of intraocular foreign bodies. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol 18(3):343–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lit E, Young L (2002) Anterior and posterior segment intraocular foreign bodies. Int Ophthalmol Clin 42(3):107–120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lieb D, Scott I, Flynn H, Miller D, Feuer W (2003) Open globe injuries with positive intraocular cultures. Ophthalmology 110(8):1560–1566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mieler W, Ellis M, Williams D, Han D (1990) Retained intraocular fore ign bodies and endonhthalmltls. Ophthalmology 97(11):1532–1538

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lott M, Fuller J, Hancock H, Singh J, Singh H, Mcgwin G, Marcus D (2008) Vitreal penetration of oral moxifloxacin in humans. Retina 28(3):473–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hariprasad S (2006) Vitreous and aqueous penetration of orally administered moxifloxacin in humans. Arch Ophthalmol 124(2):178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ahmed S, Kuruvilla O, Yee D, Aggarwal H, Li Y, Edwards P et al (2014) Intraocular penetration of systemic antibiotics in eyes with penetrating ocular injury. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 30(10):823–830

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kuhn F, Mester V, Morris R (2002) Intraocular foreign bodies. In: Kuhn F, Pieramici DJ (eds) Ocular Trauma: Principles and Practice. Thieme Medical Pub-lishers Inc, New York, Stuttgart, pp 236–257

    Google Scholar 

  32. Yang C, Lu C, Lee F, Hsu W, Lee Y, Lee S (2010) Treatment and outcome of traumatic endophthalmitis in open globe injury with retained intraocular foreign body. Ophthalmologica 224(2):79–85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon C, Mann L (2006) Epidemiology of blinding trauma in the United States eye injury registry. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 13(3):209–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Professor David G Charteris—The research was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology and the NIHR Moorfields Clinical Research Facility. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hospital Del Salvador, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Rodrigo Anguita, René Moya, Victor Saez, Alejandro Salinas, Rudolf Kobus & Rodolfo Manriquez

  2. Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

    Rodrigo Anguita, Gaurav Bhardwaj & David G. Charteris

  3. Centro de la visión, Clínica las Condes, Santiago, Chile

    René Moya

  4. Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, Discipline of Ophthalmology and Eye Health and Save Sight Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Gaurav Bhardwaj

  5. Hospital De La Florida, Santiago, Chile

    Cristóbal Nazar

Authors
  1. Rodrigo Anguita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. René Moya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Victor Saez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gaurav Bhardwaj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alejandro Salinas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rudolf Kobus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Cristóbal Nazar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rodolfo Manriquez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. David G. Charteris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rodrigo Anguita.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or nonfinancial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anguita, R., Moya, R., Saez, V. et al. Clinical presentations and surgical outcomes of intraocular foreign body presenting to an ocular trauma unit. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 259, 263–268 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04859-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04859-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation