An experimental evaluation of traumatic globe rupture

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the surgeon's ability to assess various types of globe injury, to determine the force necessary to rupture the globe with these types of injuries, and to determine typical orbital retraction forces used in the clinical setting. Materials and Methods: Forty-four enucleated globes from recently killed cows were divided into four equal groups—one uninjured control group, one group with a through-and-through scleral laceration, another group with a subtotal scierai laceration, and the last group with an 18-gauge needle perforation. Twenty-seven boarded or board eligible oral and maxillofacial surgeons were asked to assess one sample from each of the four groups. They were then asked to retract a simulated globe on a custom-fabricated jig to determine clinical retraction forces. Ten globes from each of the four groups were then subjected to forces until rupture on an Instron 8501M mechanical testing unit. Accuracy of the clinical assessment was determined, and means and standard deviations of the retraction forces and globe rupture forces were derived. Results: Through-and-through lacerations were assessed by surgeons with 100% accuracy, subtotal lacerations with 96% accuracy, uninjured globes with 74% accuracy, and perforated globes with 15% accuracy. Globe rupture occurred at 16.72 ± 7.87 kg in the control group, 20.36 ± 7.87 kg in the perforated group, 15.38 ± 6.06 kg in the subtotal laceration group, and 4.94 ± 2.56 kg in the through-and-through laceration group. Statistically significant differences ( P < .001) were noted between the total laceration group and all other groups. The mean retraction force was 0.35 ± 0.47 kg, which was statistically less than the force used in all of the rupture groups ( P < .001). Conclusions: Severe injuries (through-and-through lacerations) were assessed with 100% accuracy by the clinicians, and less severe injuries with less accuracy. Rupture forces for globes with perforations and subtotal lacerations were no different than for the control group, but substantially less than for the total laceration group. The simulated clinical retraction forces were substantially more than the rupture forces in all of the groups, including the through-and-through laceration group.