Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: To discuss surgical options and visual outcome when faced with a diamond intraoperative foreign body during macular hole surgery.
Methods: Case study of an iatrogenic in-the-macular-hole diamond particle noted during macular hole surgery. No attempt to retrieve the diamond from the macular hole was made during surgery.
Patient: Forty-seven-year-old female patient with a 483-μm macular hole.
Results: The patient's macular hole closed over the diamond particle, making it subfoveal. The visual acuity improved from 20/120 to 20/40 with resolution of metamorphopsia.
Conclusion: It is likely that the inert nature and small size of diamond particles do not significantly affect visual acuity or hole closure and do not cause retinal toxicity. The authors discourage aggressive attempts to remove such particles during surgery.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ICB.0b013e31828f664c | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!