Fuyan Wang1,2, Jun Cheng2, Hualei Zhai2, Yanling Dong2, Hua Li1,2, Lixin Xie3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Clinical Medical College of Shandong University, Jinan, China. 2. State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Shandong Eye Institute, Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Qingdao, China. 3. State Key Laboratory Cultivation Base, Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Shandong Eye Institute, Shandong First Medical University & Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Qingdao, China. lixin_xie@hotmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore a new classification scheme for acute ocular burns. METHODS: Medical records of 345 patients (450 eyes) with acute ocular burns treated at Shandong Eye Institute between January 2013 and January 2018 with a 12-month minimum follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 8 parameters in the acute phase were evaluated and graded on a scale from 0 to 3 according to their severity. RESULTS: The key factors affecting the prognosis of acute ocular burns were conjunctival involvement (386 eyes, 85.8%), corneal epithelial defect (349 eyes, 77.6%), and limbal ischemia (244 eyes, 54.2%). Visual acuity in 181/450 eyes (40.2%) was worse than 6/60. The injury severity of the cornea, limbus, bulbar conjunctiva, eyelid, and fornix and intraocular signs in the acute phase was significantly correlated with the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity (correlation coefficient [R] 0.481-0.933, P < 0.0001) and corneal opacification, neovascularization, and symblepharon scores in the stable phase (R 0.513-0.855, P < 0.0001). The mean total score for the 8 parameters in the acute phase was 5.34 ± 4.04 (range 0-14); higher scores indicated worse visual acuity (R = 0.899, P < 0.0001). The total score for acute-phase parameters was significantly correlated with that for the stable-phase parameters (R = 0.872, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The severity of acute-phase parameters is significantly correlated with the final visual outcome and prognosis. The new grading scheme can help clinicians more accurately analyze the degree of ocular burns, determine a reasonable treatment protocol, and rationally evaluate the prognosis.
PURPOSE: To explore a new classification scheme for acute ocular burns. METHODS: Medical records of 345 patients (450 eyes) with acute ocular burns treated at Shandong Eye Institute between January 2013 and January 2018 with a 12-month minimum follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 8 parameters in the acute phase were evaluated and graded on a scale from 0 to 3 according to their severity. RESULTS: The key factors affecting the prognosis of acute ocular burns were conjunctival involvement (386 eyes, 85.8%), corneal epithelial defect (349 eyes, 77.6%), and limbal ischemia (244 eyes, 54.2%). Visual acuity in 181/450 eyes (40.2%) was worse than 6/60. The injury severity of the cornea, limbus, bulbar conjunctiva, eyelid, and fornix and intraocular signs in the acute phase was significantly correlated with the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity (correlation coefficient [R] 0.481-0.933, P < 0.0001) and corneal opacification, neovascularization, and symblepharon scores in the stable phase (R 0.513-0.855, P < 0.0001). The mean total score for the 8 parameters in the acute phase was 5.34 ± 4.04 (range 0-14); higher scores indicated worse visual acuity (R = 0.899, P < 0.0001). The total score for acute-phase parameters was significantly correlated with that for the stable-phase parameters (R = 0.872, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The severity of acute-phase parameters is significantly correlated with the final visual outcome and prognosis. The new grading scheme can help clinicians more accurately analyze the degree of ocular burns, determine a reasonable treatment protocol, and rationally evaluate the prognosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acute ocular burns; Clinical features; New classification scheme; Prognosis
Authors: Henrike Westekemper; Francisco C Figueiredo; We Fong Siah; Nina Wagner; Klaus-Peter Steuhl; Daniel Meller Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-05-05 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Michelle P Lin; Ümit Ekşioğlu; Raghu C Mudumbai; Mark A Slabaugh; Philip P Chen Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Huda Al-Ghadeer; Mohammed Al Amry; Khalid A Aldihan; Omar S Alobaidan; Ghadah Mohammed S AlQahtani; Rajiv Khandekar Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2022-10-01