 |
 |

Electrical Impedance of Ocular Coats During Diathermy ApplicationsVoltage and Time of Application
Henri F. deGuillebon, Dipl Eng;
Ismail Elzeneiny, MD, MS
Arch Ophthalmol. 1970;83(4):489-503.
Abstract
The effect of voltage and time of application on the electrical impedance of ocular tissues was studied during surface diathermy on pigmented rabbits. During the application, the resistive and capacitive components of the impedance dropped due to an increase in the temperature of the tissues. This drop increased with the voltage applied and contributed to heat the tissues to a much greater extent than would be expected. After diathermy application, a new impedance measurement at the application site gave a higher value, indicating drier tissue and so-called crust formation. This crust increased with the voltage. In order to produce the same degree of chorioretinal burn, the electrical power required was higher for shorter times of application resulting in more destruction of sclera. However, the spread of heat in sclera is lessened with shorter application times.
Author Affiliations
Boston
From the Department of Retina Research, Retina Foundation, Boston. Dr. Elzeneiny's present address is Medical Center, Ophthalmic Division, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WVa.
Footnotes
Submitted for publication March 28, 1969.
Reprint requests to Library, Retina Foundation, 100 Charles River Plaza, Boston 02114.
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
An Insulated Diathermy Electrode
El-Mofty and Schepens
Arch Ophthalmol 1980;98:1115-1116.
ABSTRACT
Scleral Strength Impairment and Recovery After Diathermy
Schwartz and Rathbun
Arch Ophthalmol 1975;93:1173-1177.
ABSTRACT
A Transilluminator Scleral Marker
deGuillebon and Schepens
Arch Ophthalmol 1971;86:298-300.
ABSTRACT
The Retina and Optic Nerve
L'Esperance
Arch Ophthalmol 1971;86:210-232.
Scleral Changes During Diathermy Application: Influence of Electrode Type
deGuillebon and Ishii
Arch Ophthalmol 1970;83:752-759.
ABSTRACT
|