ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2019
Analysis of Ocular Injury Characteristics in Survivors of the 8.12 Tianjin Port Explosion, China.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of ocular injury 1-year outcome in survivors of Beirut Port ammonium nitrate blast.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022Article
- Mesenchymal stem cell secretome protects against oxidative stress-induced ocular blast visual pathologies.Experimental eye research · 2022Article
- Proteomic Analysis Revealed the Characteristics of Key Proteins Involved in the Regulation of Inflammatory Response, Leukocyte Transendothelial Migration, Phagocytosis, and Immune Process during Early Lung Blast Injury.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2021Article
- Bomb Explosion: Ocular Effects of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Mechanisms.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOn the evening of August 12, 2015, a large chemical explosion occurred at Tianjin Port. We analyzed ocular injury characteristics in the survivors of this accident.
methodsTwenty injured eyes of 17 hospitalized patients were included. Initial best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), injury type, injury cause, relative afferent pupillary defect (RAPD), zone of injury (ZOI), and ocular trauma score (OTS) were evaluated. Final BCVA and enucleation were the final outcome index. The relationship between risk factors and final outcomes was analyzed.
resultsThe patients comprised 14 males and 3 females (mean age, 35.24 ± 12.68 years). Eighteen eyes had open-globe and 2 had closed-globe injuries. Fifteen ocular injury types were reported. Initial visual acuity (VA) was 20/50 to 20/200, 20/200 to finger counting (FC), hand motion to light perception (HM-LP), and no light perception (NLP) in 2, 7, 7, and 4 eyes, respectively. RAPD was found in 5 eyes. Most eyes sustained severe injuries with OTSs of 1 (25%) and 2 (40%). Of the injured eyes, 50% had Zone III injuries. In 95% of the injured eyes, glass was the cause of injury. Three of 4 eyes with an initial VA of NLP had a final VA of NLP and an outcome of enucleation. In 5 eyes with RAPD, 3 had a final VA of NLP and a final outcome of enucleation. Eyes with lower OTSs generally had poorer outcomes. All eyes with a final VA of NLP and an enucleation outcome had Zone III injuries. All 3 eyes with an enucleation outcome had retinal injuries, whereas eyes with no retinal injury had a better final BCVA.
conclusionsExplosions can inflict severe ocular trauma, even indoors; 90% of injured eyes had open-globe injuries caused by glass fragments. Initial NLP, RAPD, low OTS, posterior extended wound, and retinal injury indicate a poor final outcome.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.