ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology case reports2022
Descemet's membrane injury due to bullet shockwave trauma.
Article in American journal of ophthalmology case reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To report a case of corneal edema associated with Descemet membrane (DM) damage likely due to shockwave trauma from a bullet passing by the eye. Observations: A 27-year-old man presented to the emergency department with pain, redness, and severely decreased vision in the left eye immediately following a gun assault. Examination of the eye revealed a temporal conjunctival laceration, corneal edema, hyphema, and vitreous hemorrhage. Bullets were found in the patient's left chest and axilla, and a laceration was present on the bridge of his nose, but no foreign bodies were found in or around the eyes. The intraocular hemorrhage and corneal edema gradually resolved, and it became apparent that there were DM irregularities that possibly represented micro-ruptures. After 7 months, uncorrected visual acuity improved to 20/25, and the cornea was free of edema but had persistent small focal areas of DM thickening and scarring. Conclusions and Importance: This case illustrates that DM and possibly endothelial cell damage can occur due to shockwave injury from high-speed projectiles. In our case of presumed small central DM micro-ruptures, the corneal edema resolved, and the vision significantly improved with topical therapy and observation, suggesting an overall good prognosis from such injuries.
Indexed as
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.