This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • 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. 1944;32(4):261-266.

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

The war and the war industries make the consideration of the treatment of intraocular foreign bodies opportune. Surgeons who heretofore have had little experience with intraocular foreign bodies are being called on to treat many injuries of this type. Roentgenologists likewise are feeling more poignantly their responsibility in this field. Naturally the question arises as to which methods of treatment are superior. After the use of various technics, I have found the procedures here described best adapted to the problem.

The choice of surgical procedure for the extraction of foreign bodies seems to be changing. Many surgeons with much experience in the handling of intraocular injuries are giving up the use of the giant magnet entirely, and others use it only in rare instances. The grosser technic of the giant magnet has not satisfied the surgeons' desire for refinement and has failed to produce results comparable to those achieved with . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
NEW YORK

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

Footnotes
Read before the Academy of Medicine, New York, Dec. 20, 1943.

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