Scleral Cautery with Iridectomy-An Experimental Study.
Scleral Cautery with Iridectomy-An Experimental Study.
复制标题
巩膜烧灼与虹膜切除术-实验研究。
DOI:
--
复制
发表时间:
1963
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
E. Regan
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
E. Regan
IN 1958 SCHEIE' described a filtering operation for glaucoma which he called peripheral iridectomy with scleral cauterv. Since that time we have employed this operation with increasing frequency and we have been impressed with the consistency with which filtration occurs. For this reason it seemed interesting to study the eyes of monkeys on which the operation had been performed. Attempts to produce filtering blebs in the eyes of experimental animals have been notoriously unsuccessful. The introduction of Elliot's trephination stimulated interest in the production and function of filtering cicatrices. Kummell2 in 1913 performed trephinations upon rabbits and found that by the tenth postoperative day fibrillary connective tissue was closing the surgical defect. From inspection of the cats' eyes removed twenty-six and thirty-two days after trephination, Rochon-Duvigneaud and Ducamp3 concluded that if fistulization occurred it was from the presence of some heterogeneous substance between the wound edges. In 1914 Ellet,4 studying the trephination operation on rabbit eyes, thought that in one instance a subconjunctival cyst indicated possible filtration, but neither Clausen5 nor Holth6 could demonstrate filtration, and Wilmer7 in 1927 stated that in his experience trephinings on dogs' eyes showed a great tendency to heal completely, although microscopic examination in nearly all cases indicated the possibility of drainage under conditions of increased intraocular pressure. In 1932, Spaeth8 studied iris inclusion operations performed on rabbits and concluded that the presence of iris pigment within the wound promoted filtration. Spaeth observed that by the thirteenth day after operation a thin space developed between the incarcerated iris and the contiguous cut surface of the sclera. The iris stroma then *From the Institute of Ophthalmology, Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center and the Department of Ophthalmology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York City. This investigation was supported by a grant from the Snyder Ophthalmic Foundation.