Transactions . Miss K. D—. 10 mm. white. July 3rd, Miss K. D—. 10 mm. white. February 20th, 1915. DETACHMENT OF THE KETINA. 99 obvious vitreous disturbance; nor could I ever see anytear in her retina, tliough it was a very easily seendetachment. I think there is, in this case, some justifica-tion for the assumption that the sequence of events wasfirst a long tear in the membrane of Brucli and a conse-quent injury to the chorio-capillaris with haemorrhageinto the subretinal space, and that the pigmentary dis-turbance now obvious is mainly due to disturbance of theretinal pigment while th
Transactions . Miss K. D—. 10 mm. white. July 3rd, Miss K. D—. 10 mm. white. February 20th, 1915. DETACHMENT OF THE KETINA. 99 obvious vitreous disturbance; nor could I ever see anytear in her retina, tliough it was a very easily seendetachment. I think there is, in this case, some justifica-tion for the assumption that the sequence of events wasfirst a long tear in the membrane of Brucli and a conse-quent injury to the chorio-capillaris with haemorrhageinto the subretinal space, and that the pigmentary dis-turbance now obvious is mainly due to disturbance of theretinal pigment while the detachment lasted. Another case, which I also hope to be able to show atthe clinical meeting, gave evidence which favoured thehypothesis of vitreous traction. Miss P—, xt. 41 years, was sent to me in August,1907, with a large detachment in her right eye. Thesight of the left eye had been lost for eighteen yearsbefore from detachment. When I saw her in August itwas owing to the absence from London of all the othersurgeons who had been in charge of
Size: 1496px × 1671px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1880, bookpu, booksubjectophthalmology
