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

RAYMOND L. PFEIFFER, M.D.

Arch Ophthal. 1943;30(6):718-726.

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

Although fracture has always been regarded as a cause of enophthalmos, there exists in the literature considerable speculation on the mechanism of the displacement of the eye when there is no external evidence of fracture. Most of the discussion on the sometimes distressing consequences of a blow on the eyeball took place before the roentgen rays were developed to a high point of usefulness. To many of the early observers fracture meant fragmentation and gross deformity. It was inconceivable to them that the eyeball could receive, withstand and transmit a blow forceful enough to fracture any of the walls of the orbit. Since means of demonstrating deep, or internal, fractures were lacking and, in later years, since roentgenography was not employed at its greatest efficiency, enophthalmos in many cases was considered an extraordinary phenomenon. Today, with the roentgen rays, one is able to study the orbit in fairly minute detail, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
NEW YORK

From the Institute of Ophthalmology of the Presbyterian Hospital, and the Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Footnotes
Read before the American Ophthalmological Society, Hot Springs, Va., June 11, 1943.

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