Intraocular Foreign Body (IOFB)

Back

Background

Intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs) are rather variable in presentation, outcome, and prognosis. With increased awareness and advanced surgical techniques, the outcome and the prognosis for these potentially devastating injuries have substantially improved.

The most important limiting factor today is the damage occurring at the time of the initial injury. One effective method appears to be prophylactic chorioretinectomy (see Surgical Care), which reduces the risk of postinjury proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR).



View Image

Metal intraocular foreign body located in the left temporal pars plana region seen on axial CT scan.

Pathophysiology

The final resting place of and damage caused by an IOFB depend on several factors, including the size, the shape, and the momentum of the object at the time of impact, as well as the site of ocular penetration.[1, 2]

IOFBs transversing the lens are less likely to cause major retinal damage; conversely, a smaller wound size usually means deeper penetration.

In addition to the initial damage caused at the time of impact, the risk of endophthalmitis and subsequent scarring (eg, PVR) play an important role in the planning of the surgical intervention.[3]

Epidemiology

Frequency

United States

According to the United States Eye Injury Registry (USEIR), the surveillance arm of the American Society of Ocular Trauma (ASOT), the incidence among eyes with open-globe injury is 16% in the United States. The most common cause is hammering; the incidence over time shows a decrease at the workplace and an increase in the home.[4]

International

The frequency greatly varies (up to 41%) worldwide, depending upon the population surveyed.

Mortality/Morbidity

Most IOFBs cause internal damage, and most will come to rest in the posterior segment. Commonly injured structures include the cornea, the lens, and the retina.

Race

No racial predilection has been found so far.

Sex

According to the USEIR, 93% of patients with IOFBs are male.

Age

According to the USEIR, the average patient is aged 31 years.

History

A few direct questions should be sufficient for the ophthalmologist to suspect the presence of an IOFB in eyes with an open globe injury.

In case of doubt, it is advisable to err on the side of an IOFB presence. The most common cause for litigation against the ophthalmologist in a trauma case is a missed IOFB. It is important to remember that the patient may be unaware of any object entering (or even striking) the eye, and the vision may be unaffected initially.

Physical

A complete examination of both eyes is necessary, including the visual acuity.

A corneal entry wound and a hole in the iris provide trajectory information.

The slit lamp is extremely useful in detailing all anterior segment pathologies.[5]

The indirect ophthalmoscope through a dilated pupil may allow direct visualization of the IOFB, which gives the most useful information for the surgeon.

Gonioscopy and scleral depression are not recommended unless the entry wound has been surgically closed.

Causes

Hammering and using power tools are the most important causes. Protective eyewear, if appropriate (3 mm of polycarbonate), prevents virtually all injuries.

Laboratory Studies

Culture an intraocular foreign body (IOFB) or a sample of vitreous if an infection is suspected. Remember that a positive result does not mean that an infection is occurring and that a negative result does not preclude the possibility of endophthalmitis.[6]

Imaging Studies

CT scans are the imaging study of choice for IOFB localization. A consultation with the CT technician is helpful in selecting the optimal section so as to reduce the risk of a false-negative result. A helical CT scan is the most efficient method to establish a diagnosis. Helical CT scans have a very high identification rate. With conventional CT scans, cuts of 0.5 mm are advised.



View Image

Metal intraocular foreign body located in the left temporal pars plana region seen on axial CT scan.



View Image

Same metallic intraocular foreign body as in previous image, as seen on coronal CT scan view.

Plain x-ray is useful if a metallic IOFB is present and a CT scan is unavailable.

MRI is generally not recommended for metallic IOFBs.

Ultrasound is a useful tool in localizing IOFBs, and its careful use is possible even if the globe is still open; alternatively, intraoperative use after wound closure can be attempted. The ultrasound biomicroscope may help with IOFBs in the anterior segment.[7, 8]

Other Tests

Electroretinography is useful if a chronic IOFB is found and siderosis threatens or is present.

Medical Care

Systemic and topical antibiotic therapy may be started prior to the surgical intervention. Topical corticosteroids are also important to minimize the inflammation. A tetanus booster may also be appropriate.

Surgical Care

The timing of intervention is primarily determined by whether the risk of endophthalmitis is high. If the risk is high, immediate (emergency) surgery, for intraocular foreign body (IOFB) removal as well as vitrectomy if the IOFB is in the posterior segment, is indicated.[9] In most other cases, the surgeon has the option of deferring intervention for a few days to reduce the risk of intraoperative hemorrhage. The wound, however, should be closed as soon as possible. A study by Zhang et al examined 1421 eyes in 15 hospitals in China over 5 years and concluded that closing the primary wound within 24 hours, whether by repair or independent self-sealing, reduces the endophthalmitis risk.[10] If endophthalmitis occurs, it is present at the time of patient presentation in over 90% of the cases.[11, 12]

IOFBs in the anterior chamber are typically removed through a paracentesis (not through the original wound) performed at 90-180° from where the IOFB is located. Viscoelastics should be used to reduce the risk of iatrogenic damage to the corneal endothelium and the lens.

An intralenticular IOFB does not necessarily cause cataract. Unless there is a risk of siderosis or the loss to follow-up is high, the IOFB and the lens may be left in situ. Otherwise, usually, the IOFB is extracted first, the lens is extracted second, and an intraocular lens (IOL) is implanted simultaneously.[13]

A posterior segment IOFB requires a vitrectomy, unless the tissue damage is minimal. The posterior hyaloid should always be removed, and any deep impact should be prophylactically treated against proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR) (see below). For the actual removal, the best tool to extract a ferrous IOFB is a strong intraocular magnet. For nonmagnetic IOFBs, a proper forceps or a lasso may be used. External electromagnets should not be used since they do not allow controlled extraction.[14, 15, 16, 17]

Rarely, a scleral cut-down is used.

If the IOFB has caused a deep impact (ie, involving the choroid), prophylactic chorioretinectomy is recommended. Using the highest setting of the diathermy machine, the probe is used to destroy the retina and the choroid around the impact site, thereby leaving a bare sclera to surround the impact site.[18] In early clinical tests, this procedure has proven to be very effective in preventing both PVR and radiating retinal folds. The same technique may be used if a chronic IOFB is found to be causing full-thickness folds in the macula, a pathologic condition that tends to be highly disturbing to the patient.[19]

Activity

No activity restriction is necessary once the wound heals and there is no need for positioning.

Medication Summary

The goal of pharmacotherapy is to reduce morbidity and to prevent complications, such as posterior synechia (pupillary dilation), inflammation (corticosteroids), and intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation.

Vancomycin (Vancocin, Vancoled, Lyphocin)

Clinical Context:  DOC for gram-positive coverage. Potent antibiotic directed against gram-positive organisms and active against Enterococcus species. Useful in the treatment of septicemia and skin structure infections. Indicated for patients who cannot receive, or have failed to respond to penicillins and cephalosporins, or have infections with resistant staphylococci. For abdominal penetrating injuries, it is combined with an agent active against enteric flora and/or anaerobes.

To avoid toxicity, current recommendation is to assay vancomycin trough levels after third dose drawn 0.5 h prior to next dosing. Use creatinine clearance to adjust dose in patients diagnosed with renal impairment.

Used in conjunction with gentamicin for prophylaxis in penicillin-allergic patients undergoing gastrointestinal or genitourinary procedures.

Ceftazidime (Ceptaz, Fortaz, Tazicef, Tazidime)

Clinical Context:  First-line choice for intravitreal gram-negative coverage. Third-generation cephalosporin with broad-spectrum, gram-negative activity; lower efficacy against gram-positive organisms; higher efficacy against resistant organisms. Arrests bacterial growth by binding to one or more penicillin-binding proteins.

Class Summary

For use in every case (systemic and topical); intravitreal usually only if infection is present or the case is high risk.

Amphotericin B (Amphocin, Fungizone)

Clinical Context:  Produced by a strain of Streptomyces nodosus; can be fungistatic or fungicidal. Binds to sterols, such as ergosterol, in the fungal cell membrane, causing intracellular components to leak with subsequent fungal cell death.

Class Summary

Their mechanism of action may involve an alteration of RNA and DNA metabolism or an intracellular accumulation of peroxide that is toxic to the fungal cell.

Further Outpatient Care

Follow-up visits are necessary for at least 4 months to determine whether proliferative vitreoretinopathy has occurred. Rehabilitation service may be necessary if permanent visual impairment is present.

If retinal folds, radiating from a retinal impact site, develop and interfere with vision by reaching into the macula—and even seemingly inconspicuous folds can cause severe visual disturbance—late chorioretinectomy should be considered.[20]

Further Inpatient Care

Unless serious complications are present, the patient can be discharged shortly after surgery.

Educate the patient about the potential of both early complications (eg, intraocular pressure elevation) and late complications (eg, scarring).

Inpatient & Outpatient Medications

Topical antibiotics and corticosteroids in the early postoperative period are indicated.

Deterrence/Prevention

Safety eyewear made of polycarbonate (3 mm in thickness) virtually eliminates the risk of intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs).

Complications

Endophthalmitis, corneal scarring, elevated intraocular pressure, cataract, retinal detachment, proliferative vitreoretinopathy, and metallosis (eg, chalcosis, siderosis) are possible complications.[21]

Prognosis

The prognosis is generally relatively good. Over one half of eyes with IOFB injury regain/retain reading vision.

Patient Education

Eye protection when partaking in risky activities (eg, hammering, mowing the lawn) is strongly recommended.[22]

Author

Ferenc Kuhn, MD, PhD, Associate Professor of Clinical Ophthalmology, University of Alabama at Birmingham; Consulting Staff, American Society of Ocular Trauma, Helen Keller Foundation for Research and Education, Chief Vitreoretinal Surgeon, Milos Klinika, Belgrade, Serbia

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

David T Wong, MD, FRCSC, Associate Professor of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine; Ophthalmologist-in-Chief, St Michael's Hospital, Canada

Disclosure: Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Novartis, Alcon, Bayer<br/>Received research grant from: Novartis, Alcon, Bayer, Genetech<br/>Received consulting fee from Alcon for consulting; Received consulting fee from Novartis for consulting; Received consulting fee from Bayer for consulting; Received consulting fee from Allergan for consulting; Received consulting fee from B & L for consulting.

Louis Giavedoni, MD, FRCSE, Co-Chief, Assistant Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Canada

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editors

Simon K Law, MD, PharmD, Clinical Professor of Health Sciences, Department of Ophthalmology, Jules Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Steve Charles, MD, Founder and CEO of Charles Retina Institute; Clinical Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Tennessee College of Medicine

Disclosure: Received royalty and consulting fees for: Alcon Laboratories.

Chief Editor

Inci Irak Dersu, MD, MPH, Associate Professor of Clinical Ophthalmology, State University of New York Downstate College of Medicine; Attending Physician, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Kings County Hospital, and VA Harbor Health Care System

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Andrew W Lawton, MD, Neuro-Ophthalmology, Ochsner Health Services

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References

  1. Boldt HC, Pulido JS, Blodi CF, et al. Rural endophthalmitis. Ophthalmology. 1989 Dec. 96(12):1722-6. [View Abstract]
  2. Potts AM, Distler JA. Shape factor in the penetration of intraocular foreign bodies. Am J Ophthalmol. 1986. 100:183-187.
  3. Knox FA, Best RM, Kinsella F, et al. Management of endophthalmitis with retained intraocular foreign body. Eye. 2004 Feb. 18(2):179-82. [View Abstract]
  4. Brown IA. Intraocular foreign bodies. Nature of injury. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 1968 Spring. 8(1):147-52. [View Abstract]
  5. Cooke CA, Mulholland DA. A closer look at anterior segment intraocular foreign bodies. Eye. 2005 Apr. 19(4):476-8. [View Abstract]
  6. Mieler WF, Ellis MK, Williams DF, et al. Retained intraocular foreign bodies and endophthalmitis. Ophthalmology. 1990 Nov. 97(11):1532-8. [View Abstract]
  7. Coleman DJ, Jack RL, Franzen LA. Ultrasonography in ocular trauma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1973 Feb. 75(2):279-88. [View Abstract]
  8. Penner R, Passmore JW. Magnetic vs nonmagnetic intraocular foreign bodies. An ultrasonic determination. Arch Ophthalmol. 1966 Nov. 76(5):676-7. [View Abstract]
  9. Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon CD. Intraocular foreign body (posterior segment). In: Masters Techniques in Ophthalmic Surgery. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins;. 1995:1201-1212.
  10. Zhang Y, Zhang M, Jiang C, Qiu HY. Intraocular foreign bodies in china: clinical characteristics, prognostic factors, and visual outcomes in 1421 eyes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011 Jul. 152(1):66-73.e1. [View Abstract]
  11. Demircan N, Soylu M, Yagmur M, et al. Pars plana vitrectomy in ocular injury with intraocular foreign body. J Trauma. 2005 Nov. 59(5):1216-8. [View Abstract]
  12. Thompson JT, Parver LM, Enger CL, et al. Infectious endophthalmitis after penetrating injuries with retained intraocular foreign bodies. National Eye Trauma System. Ophthalmology. 1993 Oct. 100(10):1468-74. [View Abstract]
  13. Kumar A, Kumar V, Dapling RB. Traumatic cataract and intralenticular foreign body. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2005 Dec. 33(6):660-1. [View Abstract]
  14. Cridland N. Magnetic extraction. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 1986. 8(1):213-29.
  15. Kuhn F, Heimann K. [A new permanent magnet for removal of intra-ocular ferromagnetic foreign bodies]. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 1991 Apr. 198(4):301-3. [View Abstract]
  16. Lo Bue TD, Deutsch TA, Lobick J. Detection and localization of nonmetallic intraocular foreign bodies by magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988. 106(2):260-1.
  17. Soheilian M, Abolhasani A, Ahmadieh H, et al. Management of magnetic intravitreal foreign bodies in 71 eyes. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2004 Sep-Oct. 35(5):372-8. [View Abstract]
  18. Michels RG, Rice TA. Bimanual bipolar diathermy for treatment of bleeding from the anterior chamber angle. Am J Ophthalmol. 1977 Dec. 84(6):873-4. [View Abstract]
  19. Kuhn F, Teixeira S, Pelayes DE. Late versus prophylactic chorioretinectomy for the prevention of trauma-related proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Ophthalmic Res. 2012. 48 Suppl 1:32-7. [View Abstract]
  20. Kuhn F, Teixeira S, Pelayes DE. Late versus prophylactic chorioretinectomy for the prevention of trauma-related proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Ophthalmic Res. 2012. 48 Suppl 1:32-7. [View Abstract]
  21. Weissgold DJ, Kaushal P. Late onset of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments after successful posterior segment intraocular foreign body removal. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Mar. 89(3):327-31. [View Abstract]
  22. Lubniewski A, Olk RJ, Grand MG. Ocular dangers in the garden. A new menace--nylon line lawn trimmers. Ophthalmology. 1988 Jul. 95(7):906-10. [View Abstract]
  23. Azad RV, Kumar N, Sharma YR, et al. Role of prophylactic scleral buckling in the management of retained intraocular foreign bodies. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2004 Feb. 32(1):58-61. [View Abstract]
  24. Barry DR. Effects of retained intraocular foreign bodies. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 1968 Spring. 8(1):153-70. [View Abstract]
  25. Behrens-Braumann W, Praetorius G. Intraocular foreign bodies: 297 consecutive cases. Ophthalmologica. 1989. 198(2):84-8.
  26. Coleman DJ, Lucas BC, Rondeau MJ, et al. Management of intraocular foreign bodies. Ophthalmology. 1987 Dec. 94(12):1647-53. [View Abstract]
  27. Duker JS, Fischer DH. Occult plastic intraocular foreign body. Ophthalmic Surg. 1989 Mar. 20(3):169-70. [View Abstract]
  28. Erakgun T, Akkin C, Mentes J. Management of the posterior segment foreign bodies with a simple snare. Retina. 2003 Dec. 23(6):858-60. [View Abstract]
  29. Johnston S. Perforating eye injuries: a five year survey. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K. 1971. 91:895-921. [View Abstract]
  30. Kuhn F, Mester V, Morris R. A proactive treatment approach for eyes with perforating injury. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 2004 Aug. 221(8):622-8. [View Abstract]
  31. Kuhn F, Mester V, Morris R. Intraocular foreign bodies. Ocular Trauma: Principles and Practice. New York: Thieme; 2002. 235-263.
  32. Mader TH, Carroll RD, Slade CS, et al. Ocular war injuries of the Iraqi Insurgency, January-September 2004. Ophthalmology. 2006 Jan. 113(1):97-104. [View Abstract]
  33. Percival SP. A decade of intraocular foreign bodies. Br J Ophthalmol. 1972 Jun. 56(6):454-61. [View Abstract]
  34. Roper-Hall MJ. Review of 555 cases of intraocular foreign body with special references to prognosis. Br J Ophthalmol. 1954. 38:65-99.
  35. Smiddy WE, Hamburg TR, Kracher GP, et al. Contact lenses for visual rehabilitation after corneal laceration repair. Ophthalmology. 1989 Mar. 96(3):293-8. [View Abstract]
  36. Sternberg P Jr, de Juan E Jr, Michels RG, et al. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in penetrating ocular injuries. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984 Oct 15. 98(4):467-72. [View Abstract]
  37. Thach AB, Ward TP, Dick JS, et al. Intraocular foreign body injuries during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Ophthalmology. 2005 Oct. 112(10):1829-33. [View Abstract]
  38. Williams DF, Mieler WF, Abrams GW, et al. Results and prognostic factors in penetrating ocular injuries with retained intraocular foreign bodies. Ophthalmology. 1988 Jul. 95(7):911-6. [View Abstract]
  39. Williams S, Char DH, Dillon WP, et al. Ferrous intraocular foreign bodies and magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Ophthalmol. 1988 Apr 15. 105(4):398-401. [View Abstract]
  40. Wong TY, Tielsch JM. A population-based study on the incidence of severe ocular trauma in Singapore. Am J Ophthalmol. 1999 Sep. 128(3):345-51. [View Abstract]
  41. Zinreich SJ, Miller NR, Aguayo JB, et al. Computed tomographic three-dimensional localization and compositional evaluation of intraocular and orbital foreign bodies. Arch Ophthalmol. 1986 Oct. 104(10):1477-82. [View Abstract]

Metal intraocular foreign body located in the left temporal pars plana region seen on axial CT scan.

Metal intraocular foreign body located in the left temporal pars plana region seen on axial CT scan.

Same metallic intraocular foreign body as in previous image, as seen on coronal CT scan view.

Metal intraocular foreign body located in the left temporal pars plana region seen on axial CT scan.

Same metallic intraocular foreign body as in previous image, as seen on coronal CT scan view.