CERTIFICATE

IMPACT FACTOR 2021

Subject Area

  • Life Sciences / Biology
  • Architecture / Building Management
  • Asian Studies
  • Business & Management
  • Chemistry
  • Computer Science
  • Economics & Finance
  • Engineering / Acoustics
  • Environmental Science
  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Pharmaceutical Sciences
  • General Sciences
  • Materials Science
  • Mathematics
  • Medicine
  • Nanotechnology & Nanoscience
  • Nonlinear Science
  • Chaos & Dynamical Systems
  • Physics
  • Social Sciences & Humanities

Why Us? >>

  • Open Access
  • Peer Reviewed
  • Rapid Publication
  • Life time hosting
  • Free promotion service
  • Free indexing service
  • More citations
  • Search engine friendly

Visual outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with open globe injuries managed by Vitrectomy

Author: 
Inna Malik, Syed Sadaf Altaf and Sabia Rashid
Subject Area: 
Health Sciences
Abstract: 

Background: Ocular trauma refers to any injury to the eye. Mechanical trauma to the eye is subdivided into open and closed globe injuries. An open globe injury is defined as a full thickness wound of the eye wall and intraocular structures. The annual global incidence rate is 3.5/100000 persons. The Ocular Trauma Classification group has developed a classification system based on Birmingham Eye Trauma Terminology (BETT) and features of globe injury at initial examination. Objective: To assess risk factors prognosticating final visual outcome of post vitrectomy patients with open globe injuries. Methods: The patients with open globe injuries of all age groups on follow up for atleast6 months were included in the study. Patients were assessed by clinical examination, indirect ophthalmoscopy, X-Ray/CT scan, B scan in cases with opaque media, timing of Pars planavitrectomy, final visual outcome and retinal reattachment. Patients underwent primary repair followed by vitrectomy depending on type, severity, duration of trauma and were followed up at 1week,1month,2 months and 6months post vitrectomy. Results: The study population consisted of 75 males and 3 females, ratio of male: female was 25:1 with mean age of 20.9±7.16 years. Time duration from primary repair upto vitrectomy was <15 days in 34 (43.65%), anterior chamber was maintained in 63 (80.8%) eyes, relative afferent pupillary defect was present in 12 (15.4%) eyes. Mean visual acuity showed significant improvement from 2.26± 1.82logMAR (Hand movements) preoperatively to 1.76± 1.39 logMAR (p=0.014) at 1 month, 1.51±1.071 logMAR (p=0.007) at 2 months, 1.23±0.96 logMAR (6/96) (p<0.001) at 6 months. Retinal detachment was present in 10 (12.8%) eyes and showed poor visual outcome compared to rest 68 (87.1%) of eyes with no retinal detachment (p=0.01) which was statistically significant. Out of 78 eyes, 1 (1.3%) eye presented with vision of 6/18, 2 (2.6%) eyes with 6/36, 20 (25.6%) eyes with finger counting 1 metre, 32 (41.0%) eyes with hand movements, 23 (29.5%) eyes perception of light. Postoperatively at the end of 6 months 17 (21.8%) eyes had 6/6-6/9 vision, 13 (16.7%) eyes had 6/12-6/24 vision,16 (20.5%) eyes had 6/36-6/60, 11 (14.1%) eyes had finger counting at 1 metre, 12 (15.3%) eyes had hand movements, 8 (10.3%) eyes had perception of light and only one patient remained with no light perception as he presented with optic nerve avulsion preoperatively. Conclusion: Good preoperative visual acuity had good prognosis, but poor visual acuity did not correlate with poor visual outcome, which means that with vitrectomy the prognosis could improve in patients with lower initial visual acuity.

PDF file: 

ONLINE PAYPAL PAYMENT

IJMCE RECOMMENDATION

Advantages of IJCR

  • Rapid Publishing
  • Professional publishing practices
  • Indexing in leading database
  • High level of citation
  • High Qualitiy reader base
  • High level author suport

Plagiarism Detection

IJCR is following an instant policy on rejection those received papers with plagiarism rate of more than 20%. So, All of authors and contributors must check their papers before submission to making assurance of following our anti-plagiarism policies.

 

EDITORIAL BOARD

Dr. Swamy KRM
India
Dr. Abdul Hannan A.M.S
Saudi Arabia.
Luai Farhan Zghair
Iraq
Hasan Ali Abed Al-Zu’bi
Jordanian
Fredrick OJIJA
Tanzanian
Firuza M. Tursunkhodjaeva
Uzbekistan
Faraz Ahmed Farooqi
Saudi Arabia
Eric Randy Reyes Politud
Philippines
Elsadig Gasoom FadelAlla Elbashir
Sudan
Eapen, Asha Sarah
United State
Dr.Arun Kumar A
India
Dr. Zafar Iqbal
Pakistan
Dr. SHAHERA S.PATEL
India
Dr. Ruchika Khanna
India
Dr. Recep TAS
Turkey
Dr. Rasha Ali Eldeeb
Egypt
Dr. Pralhad Kanhaiyalal Rahangdale
India
DR. PATRICK D. CERNA
Philippines
Dr. Nicolas Padilla- Raygoza
Mexico
Dr. Mustafa Y. G. Younis
Libiya
Dr. Muhammad shoaib Ahmedani
Saudi Arabia
DR. MUHAMMAD ISMAIL MOHMAND
United State
DR. MAHESH SHIVAJI CHAVAN
India
DR. M. ARUNA
India
Dr. Lim Gee Nee
Malaysia
Dr. Jatinder Pal Singh Chawla
India
DR. IRAM BOKHARI
Pakistan
Dr. FARHAT NAZ RAHMAN
Pakistan
Dr. Devendra kumar Gupta
India
Dr. ASHWANI KUMAR DUBEY
India
Dr. Ali Seidi
Iran
Dr. Achmad Choerudin
Indonesia
Dr Ashok Kumar Verma
India
Thi Mong Diep NGUYEN
France
Dr. Muhammad Akram
Pakistan
Dr. Imran Azad
Oman
Dr. Meenakshi Malik
India
Aseel Hadi Hamzah
Iraq
Anam Bhatti
Malaysia
Md. Amir Hossain
Bangladesh
Ahmet İPEKÇİ
Turkey
Mirzadi Gohari
Iran