Chirag M Shah1, Ronald C Gentile, Mitul C Mehta. 1. *Department of Ophthalmology, Stony Brook School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York; †Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, New York; ‡New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai, New York, New York; and §University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the utility of perfluoro-n-octane (PFO) in balanced salt solution (BSS) to shield the macula from the impact of dropped metallic intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs) by modeling scenarios in which they may fall during surgical removal. METHODS: Model eyes were filled with various fluid mixtures (Group 1: 10% PFO/90% BSS; Group 2: 100% BSS; Group 3: 100% PFO; Group 4: 10% PFO/90% air; Group 5: 10% BSS/90% air). In Groups 1, 4, and 5, the 10% fluid volume covered the theoretical macula. For each fluid mixture, up to 30 IOFB drop scenarios were performed for each of the 5 sample IOFBs from 3 locations. Trajectories were recorded using a camera attached to a Zeiss operating microscope (Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany). The percentages of IOFBs impacting the macula were calculated and Fisher exact test was used to assess differences. RESULTS: In Group 1, 93% (417/450) of the dropped IOFBs were deflected by the PFO-BSS interface compared with 0% (0/500) in Groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 (P < 0.01). With the exception of the heaviest IOFB (24.4 mg), which impacted the macula in 30% of tests when dropped from the superior posterior segment (P < 0.01), all other IOFBs (2.8-13.4 mg) were deflected by the PFO-BSS interface in 100% of Group 1 drops (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: As demonstrated by these simulations, the PFO-BSS interface can deflect IOFBs dropped during surgery in a wide range of scenarios, especially when the IOFB is of lower mass.
PURPOSE: To examine the utility of perfluoro-n-octane (PFO) in balanced salt solution (BSS) to shield the macula from the impact of dropped metallic intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs) by modeling scenarios in which they may fall during surgical removal. METHODS: Model eyes were filled with various fluid mixtures (Group 1: 10% PFO/90% BSS; Group 2: 100% BSS; Group 3: 100% PFO; Group 4: 10% PFO/90% air; Group 5: 10% BSS/90% air). In Groups 1, 4, and 5, the 10% fluid volume covered the theoretical macula. For each fluid mixture, up to 30 IOFB drop scenarios were performed for each of the 5 sample IOFBs from 3 locations. Trajectories were recorded using a camera attached to a Zeiss operating microscope (Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany). The percentages of IOFBs impacting the macula were calculated and Fisher exact test was used to assess differences. RESULTS: In Group 1, 93% (417/450) of the dropped IOFBs were deflected by the PFO-BSS interface compared with 0% (0/500) in Groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 (P < 0.01). With the exception of the heaviest IOFB (24.4 mg), which impacted the macula in 30% of tests when dropped from the superior posterior segment (P < 0.01), all other IOFBs (2.8-13.4 mg) were deflected by the PFO-BSS interface in 100% of Group 1 drops (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: As demonstrated by these simulations, the PFO-BSS interface can deflect IOFBs dropped during surgery in a wide range of scenarios, especially when the IOFB is of lower mass.