You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 70 No. 4, October 1963 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ARTICLES
 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
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (2)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Iris as Pharmacologic Indicator

II. A Supposed Parasympathomimetic Effect of Novocaine Upon the Pupil

IRENE E. LOEWENFELD, PhD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1963;70(4):535-539.

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

Drischel and Schaubitzer described experiments which lead them to conclude that procaine hydrochloride (Novocaine), instilled into the conjunctival sac of normal human subjects, or injected intravenously, had parasympathomimetic effects upon the pupil, similar to pilocarpine.1

The authors recorded pupillary reactions to standardized short light flashes, using an infrared-sensitive photoelectric device which registered light reflected by the iris. In this type of instrument, a beam of dark red-infrared light is directed upon the eye. When the iris expands during pupillary contraction, more of this light is reflected, and thus a photocell, exposed to the reflected light, emits more current. Conversely, when the iris surface shrinks during pupillary dilation, the photoelectric current is reduced.

The absolute amount of light reflected by the iris varies from subject to subject because of different degrees of pigmentation of the eyes and other factors. The photocurrents obtained were therefore amplified arbitrarily until the responses to . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

New York

Department of Ophthalmology, Laboratory of Pupillography, Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons, and the Presbyterian Hospital, New York.


Footnotes

Submitted for publication Oct 31, 1962.

This work was supported by the Harriman Fund and by a grant from the US Public Health Service (Sens. Dis. B-253).



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





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1963 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.