This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Donald A. Frambach, MD; Colin Ma, MD; Peter E. Liggett, MD
Los Angeles, Calif

Arch Ophthalmol. 1990;108(6):781.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—We recently had an experience where a serious complication could have occurred due to faulty setup of vitrectomy instrumentation. During the course of a routine vitrectomy, we were given an aspiration needle, by the operating room staff, that expelled compressed air at high pressure. We were using a Daisy (Stortz Instrument Co, St Louis, Mo) microvitrectomy unit, and a check of the line revealed that the aspiration needle had been connected to the pneumatic driver for the vitrectomy handpiece rather than to the aspiration port. The Daisy microvitrectomy control unit puts out a pressure of 80 psi into the pneumatic driver, and, taking into account pressure loss through the line, the pressure is still about 30 psi (1500 mm Hg) at the microvitrectomy cutter. We could have injected compressed air at 1500 mm Hg into our patient's eye!

This incident occurred when the operating room staff modified . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?