Published online Feb 26, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i6.1245
Peer-review started: September 24, 2022
First decision: November 16, 2022
Revised: November 19, 2022
Accepted: January 31, 2023
Article in press: January 31, 2023
Published online: February 26, 2023
Processing time: 152 Days and 15.9 Hours
Chemical ocular injury is one of the common ophthalmologic emergencies that can cause vision loss and serious complications. Despite all protective measures, it continues to be a serious public health problem, especially in young male patients. Although it is known that injuries occur most frequently in the workplace and in young male patients, there is a variable frequency and distribution in different regions around the world. In addition, with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, there are changing trends in ocular chemical injuries. This review aims to specify an update on the epidemiological and etiological features of ocular chemical injuries.
Core Tip: Epidemiological and demographic characteristics are important to prevent ocular chemical injuries, one of the most important ocular emergencies.
- Citation: Akgun Z, Selver OB. Epidemiology and etiology of chemical ocular injury: A brief review. World J Clin Cases 2023; 11(6): 1245-1251
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v11/i6/1245.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v11.i6.1245
Ocular surface chemical injuries are ophthalmological emergencies that can cause prompt destruction, serious anterior segment complications, and permanent visual loss[1] (Figure 1). Chemical eye injuries have accounted for a significant proportion of ocular traumas over the years. Studies in the 80s-90s report that chemical injuries accounted for 7.7%-18.0% of all ocular injuries. In 2018, Sharma et al[2] reported that chemical injuries are responsible for approximately 11.5%-22.1% of ocular injuries[3]. Effective and rapid intervention, clinical evaluation of the injury severity, and prompt treatment are essential. Injury grade depends on the causative agent type, pH, and exposure time. Appropriate and sufficient management of the chronic process of the disease results in better visual outcomes and lower complication rates. The visual prognosis of a severe ocular chemical injury is generally poor[4]. However, current developments in treatment strategies are encouraging for both visual and clinical outcomes. Evaluation of the epidemiological and etiological factors of ocular chemical injuries benefits to prevent injuries. Ocular chemical injuries can be classified in accordance with various factors such as agent type, type of injury, gender, and age. It is known that most injuries occur at work in the young male population. However, it varies according to the socioeconomic and educational status of the countries, and the rate of use of protective equipment[5]. Ocular chemical injuries may occur due to assault and assault injuries are frequently associated with more serious injuries[6,7]. Consequently, ocular chemical injuries and their sequelae create a serious social, economic, and psychological burden. This brief review aims to present a current approach to the epidemiology, etiology, and predisposition of ocular chemical injuries.
Ocular chemical injuries account for 10.7%–34.7% of all chemical burn injuries. Also, 0.1%–15.5% of all ocular traumas among hospitalized adults are secondary to ocular chemical injury, and this rate has increased over the years[8,9]. For example, a study from Serbia reported that ocular surface chemical injuries accounted for 2.7% of hospitalized ocular injuries in 1999 and 15.5% in 2008[10]. In 2021, in a meta-analysis of 88 studies, Ahmed et al[5] reported that ocular chemical injuries have an incidence ranging from 5.1 to 50 per 100000 population per year in different countries. The incidence of chemical injury was reported as 5.11/100000/year in the United States in 2015 and 5.6/100000/year in the United Kingdom in 2019. Likewise, in 2015, it was reported as 50/100000/year for the working population in Switzerland. In economically underdeveloped countries, the rate of chemical ocular injuries was lower (2.2%-8%) among emergency ocular traumas, and it was 11-13% in developing countries such as Turkey[11,12]. Considering the seasonal distribution of chemical injuries, it has been reported that they occur more frequently in Serbia and the United States in summer and in Turkey in winter[13].
The severity of injury varies considerably between studies, with the frequency of mild injuries ranging from 57% to 70%. The prevalence of severe injury in the United Kingdom was reported as 0.02/100000/year in 2009 and 0.29/100000/year in 2019. Similarly, it was reported as 1.58/100000/year in China in 2010[14,15]. The distribution of chemical injury severity may vary in accordance with socioeconomic conditions. In the literature, in developed countries, low-grade chemical injuries (grades 1-3) account for approximately 83%-90% of all chemical injuries. In contrast, severe injuries occur more frequently in developing and underdeveloped countries[15,16]. Bizrah et al[17] reported that of all ocular chemical injuries, 83% were low-grade injuries and 17% were serious injuries in the United Kingdom. In contrast, a similar study from India reported that 51% of eyes had low-grade injuries, but 35.9% had serious injuries[18]. While only alkaline agents were evaluated, Merle et al[19] reported that 50% of injuries were grade I, 31% were grade II, and 19% were grades III-IV according to the Roper-hall classification, in Martinique. Similarly, Moon et al[20] found that 75% of all alkali ocular surface injuries were grade I injuries in Australia. Nevertheless, the hospitalization rate was not related to economic development. Assault-related ocular chemical injuries are not unique to developing countries with similar frequency worldwide. Moreover, there has been a global increasing trend recently[21]. Assault-related cases were noted to result in more serious injuries globally. Studies from India and Martinique reported that 50% and 32.7% of assault-related eye injuries are high-grade injuries, respectively[22].
Alkaline injuries are more common than acidic injuries due to their extensive industrial and domestic use[23]. Alkaline agents pose a therapeutic challenge in the management of chemical injuries. Alkaline agents have a higher penetration rate than acids[24]. The most important factor determining the potency of an alkaline agent is pH, and severe corneal damage occurs if the pH is 11.5 or more[25]. Alkaline agents cause saponification of cell membranes due to their lipophilic nature. The hydroxyl ions in alkali cause saponification of the cell membrane, leading to cell membrane lysis. They can promptly penetrate the anterior segment of the eye, such as the iris, ciliary body, trabecular meshwork, and crystalline lens. The inflammatory response progresses quickly due to the release of proteolytic enzymes from the injured tissue. In addition, associated vascular damage leads to ischemia. In contrast, acids fix and coagulate the superficial tissues which prevent deep penetration of the agent[26]. Alkaline injuries account for 19–73% of all cases of ocular chemical injury. The rate of ocular chemical injuries caused by alkaline agents was reported to be 66.7%-67.9%[27,28]. Acids account for approximately 5%–47.6% of cases, with sulfuric, hydrochloric, and nitric acids being common[13,29]. High-grade injuries mostly occur with alkaline agents. Kılıç Müftüoğlu et al[30] reported that 80.9% of chemical injuries were due to alkaline agents, and 48.1% of patients with alkali damage were severe. Sodium hydroxide and lime were the most common causative agents, causing 26% and 65% of alkaline ocular surface injuries, respectively[31]. Among alkaline substances, ammonia has the highest destructive potential, and lime is relatively less toxic[32]. The most common cause of ocular surface injuries by acidic agents is sulfuric acid, which rarely causes high-grade ocular injuries. Injuries with these agents have often occurred in the industry (construction, manufacturing, chemical, petroleum, etc.) and at home (household cleaning and personal care products)[33]. However, distinct from other acids, hydrofluoric acid has a strong liquifying effect on cell membranes and has an analogous effect to alkaline agents[34]. In spite of being a weak acid, hydrofluoric acid easily penetrates the corneal epithelium. In deeper tissues, hydrofluoric acid dissolves, and the free fluoride ions released cause irreversible damage[35].
The workplace was a common site of ocular surface injury, where 43%–86% of all cases in adults occurred. Ocular chemical injuries were responsible for 6%-45% of occupational ocular injuries and 2.8% of occupational burns. Characteristically, young males working in the industry are the most common patient group[36]. In the literature, it is reported that almost two-thirds of ocular injuries occur in the workplace among people of working age and male gender (ratio 3-8:1). In a study conducted in Germany, a total of 131 severe ocular injuries were recorded, with 84% being chemical injuries and 72% being work-related[16]. In a study from Turkey, Akgun et al[37] reported that the most common cause of injury (45.1%) was occupational accidents and it was more common in men (male/female: 86/18) in the last 10 years. There is a variability of protective equipment used in the workplace, depending on the development status of the country. From Nigeria, Adepoju et al[38] reported that protective equipment was not used in any of the work-related chemical ocular injuries. Moreover, even in developed countries, the use of protective equipment may still be inadequate. Domestic and hobby injuries accounted for 7%-33% of ocular chemical injuries. In the United States, domestic injuries were more common in children (13.8%) and patients over 65 (16.4%) compared to the 18-64 age group (8.72%)[39].
While ocular chemical injuries can occur in all age groups, it is known that the group most at risk is young adult men. It has been reported in studies that 54.4%-97.5% of the cases were men. However, the rate of injuries caused by domestic products is higher in women. It is known that patients between the ages of 15-35 account for more than half of all cases[18,40,41]. However, several studies in the United States, Serbia, and China noted that 41-50 years old had the highest injury frequency of all age groups[13,42]. Furthermore, children are at risk for ocular chemical injuries. The rate of ocular trauma secondary to chemical injury in children was similar to that in adults. Haring et al[39] reported that 19.9% of patients with ocular chemical injuries admitted to the emergency department in the United States were children. A study from India reported that chemical injuries were responsible for 3.9% of ocular traumas in children under 14 years of age. Some studies have suggested a higher incidence of serious injury in children[43]. Vajpayee et al[40] reported that 85% of ocular chemical injuries in children required surgical intervention and 70.1% of patients had severe sequelae such as limbal stem cell deficiency. In contrast to adults, chemical injuries in the pediatric population are generally associated with domestic accidents, and the most common source of injury varies between diverse studies[44]. The most reported causative agents were domestic chemicals such as detergent capsules, lye, sodium hydroxide, household cleaning products, deodorants, and perfumes in many studies[45]. Haring et al[39] reported that the rate of acid-related chemical burns in children was higher than that with alkaline agents. In a study from Turkey, Korkmaz et al[46] reported that the causes of the majority (51.6%) of ocular surface injuries in children are unknown or neutral substances.
The incidence of such accidents differs in special age groups depending on the developmental stages of children. Haring et al[39] reported that the risk of chemical ocular injury was highest between 1 and 2 years of age and that the rate of alkaline burns was higher in children 3 years of age and younger, in their study involving 143985 patients. A study from the United Kingdom reported that 92.5% of ocular face injuries with detergent capsules occurred in children under 5 years of age[47]. As in adults, the incidence of ocular chemical injuries tends to be higher in boys. Korkmaz et al[46] evaluated pediatric chemical eye injuries in the last 10 years and reported that the mean age was 10.4 ± 5.5 years, 27.2% were younger than 5 years old, and 63.6% were boys. Pollard et al[48] reported that children aged 4 years and younger experienced eye injuries at a rate of 32% more than other age groups. The profile of causative agents for the geriatric population is similar to that for children, probably due to retirement and spending most of the day at home. Similar to the pediatric population, common agents of ocular surface injuries in elderly patients are bleach, chlorine, detergent, gasoline, glue, lens cleaner, oil, and paint[49].
Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a changing trend is detected in the etiology of ocular chemical injury, as in many situations. Contrary to the pre-pandemic data, neutral causes have become more common due to the increased use of alcohol-based hand sanitizers, which is a neutral chemical agent, during the pandemic period[50]. The yearly average of patients with ocular surface burns decreased to 316 patients during the COVID-19 phase as compared to 445 patients during the pre-COVID-19 phase[51]. In a recent meta-analysis, 3 of 5 studies that compared the incidence of chemical eye injuries during the pandemic and control periods, reported a decreased incidence of chemical eye injury during the pandemic period. However, the rate of chemical eye injuries increased among all ocular traumas[52]. Martin et al[53] reported that although there was no significant difference in the rate of chemical injuries in children during the pandemic compared to the control period (4% and 5% in 2019 and 2020, respectively), chemical eye injuries due to alcohol-based disinfectants increased from 1 case to 16 cases. Wasser et al[54] reported that the incidence of pediatric chemical injury was 36 in 2019, increasing to 72 cases during the pandemic. Furthermore, a significant increase in chemical injuries due to alcohol-based disinfectants was observed. Finally, compared to the pre-pandemic period, ocular trauma remained stable but the proportion of chemical injuries increased by 13.7%[55].
Although it has been reported in various studies that ocular chemical injuries are more common in Afro-Caribbean, Caucasian, and non-Hispanic ethnicities, a clear relationship between ethnicity and the prevalence of ocular chemical injury has not been identified[56].
Ocular chemical injuries are one of the most important ocular emergencies, constituting a significant proportion of all traumas. To minimize sequelae, prompt and accurate treatment in the early period and successful management of complications in the long term are essential. Chemical ocular injuries have significant psychological, physical, and economic effects, especially since serious injuries can cause permanent blindness. The distribution and severity of ocular chemical injuries worldwide vary according to socio-economic conditions, as in all other traumas. In order to prevent further damage due to ocular chemical injury, it is important to understand the epidemiological and demographic characteristics of the injury and take precautions accordingly.
Provenance and peer review: Invited article; Externally peer reviewed.
Peer-review model: Single blind
Specialty type: Ophthalmology
Country/Territory of origin: Turkey
Peer-review report’s scientific quality classification
Grade A (Excellent): 0
Grade B (Very good): 0
Grade C (Good): C
Grade D (Fair): D
Grade E (Poor): 0
P-Reviewer: M'Koma AE, United States; Samadder S, India S-Editor: Xing YX L-Editor: Wang TQ P-Editor: Xing YX
1. | Eslani M, Baradaran-Rafii A, Movahedan A, Djalilian AR. The ocular surface chemical burns. J Ophthalmol. 2014;2014:196827. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 86] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 78] [Article Influence: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
2. | Sharma N, Kaur M, Agarwal T, Sangwan VS, Vajpayee RB. Treatment of acute ocular chemical burns. Surv Ophthalmol. 2018;63:214-235. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 82] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 104] [Article Influence: 14.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
3. | Merle H, Gérard M, Schrage N. [Ocular burns]. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2008;31:723-734. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
4. | Singh P, Tyagi M, Kumar Y, Gupta KK, Sharma PD. Ocular chemical injuries and their management. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2013;6:83-86. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 120] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 129] [Article Influence: 12.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
5. | Ahmmed AA, Ting DSJ, Figueiredo FC. Epidemiology, economic and humanistic burdens of Ocular Surface Chemical Injury: A narrative review. Ocul Surf. 2021;20:199-211. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
6. | Lewis CJ, Al-Mousawi A, Jha A, Allison KP. Is it time for a change in the approach to chemical burns? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2017;70:563-567. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
7. | Hossain RR, Papamichael E, Coombes A. East London deliberate corrosive fluid injuries. Eye (Lond). 2020;34:733-739. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
8. | Koh DH, Lee SG, Kim HC. Incidence and characteristics of chemical burns. Burns. 2017;43:654-664. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
9. | Li T, Jiang B, Zhou X. Clinical characteristics of patients hospitalized for ocular chemical injuries in Shanghai from 2012 to 2017. Int Ophthalmol. 2020;40:909-916. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
10. | Radosavljević A, Kalezić T, Golubović S. The frequency of chemical injuries of the eye in a tertiary referral centre. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2013;141:592-596. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
11. | Oner A, Kekec Z, Karakucuk S, Ikizceli I, Sözüer EM. Ocular trauma in Turkey: a 2-year prospective study. Adv Ther. 2006;23:274-283. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
12. | Milton R, Mathieu L, Hall AH, Maibach HI. Chemical assault and skin/eye burns: two representative cases, report from the Acid Survivors Foundation, and literature review. Burns. 2010;36:924-932. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
13. | Blackburn J, Levitan EB, MacLennan PA, Owsley C, McGwin G Jr. The epidemiology of chemical eye injuries. Curr Eye Res. 2012;37:787-793. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
14. | Ghosh S, Salvador-Culla B, Kotagiri A, Pushpoth S, Tey A, Johnson ZK, Figueiredo FC. Acute Chemical Eye Injury and Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency-A Prospective Study in the United Kingdom. Cornea. 2019;38:8-12. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 22] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 23] [Article Influence: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
15. | Yu TS, Liu H, Hui K. A case-control study of eye injuries in the workplace in Hong Kong. Ophthalmology. 2004;111:70-74. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 43] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 38] [Article Influence: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
16. | Kuckelkorn R, Kottek A, Reim M. [Intraocular complications after severe chemical burns--incidence and surgical treatment]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1994;205:86-92. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 28] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 31] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
17. | Bizrah M, Yusuf A, Ahmad S. An update on chemical eye burns. Eye (Lond). 2019;33:1362-1377. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 85] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 79] [Article Influence: 15.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
18. | Saini JS, Sharma A. Ocular chemical burns--clinical and demographic profile. Burns. 1993;19:67-69. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 40] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 41] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
19. | Merle H, Donnio A, Ayeboua L, Michel F, Thomas F, Ketterle J, Leonard C, Josset P, Gerard M. Alkali ocular burns in Martinique (French West Indies) Evaluation of the use of an amphoteric solution as the rinsing product. Burns. 2005;31:205-211. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 44] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 28] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
20. | Moon ME, Robertson IF. Retrospective study of alkali burns of the eye. Aust J Ophthalmol. 1983;11:281-286. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
21. | Bodh SA, Kumar V, Raina UK, Ghosh B, Thakar M. Inflammatory glaucoma. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2011;4:3-9. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 35] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 44] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
22. | Lynn DD, Zukin LM, Dellavalle R. The safety and efficacy of Diphoterine for ocular and cutaneous burns in humans. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2017;36:185-192. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 12] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
23. | Welling JD, Pike EC, Mauger TF. Alkali Burn of the Ocular Surface Associated With a Commonly Used Antifog Agent for Eyewear: Two Cases and a Review of Previous Reports. Cornea. 2016;35:289-291. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
24. | HUGHES WF Jr. Alkali burns of the eye; clinical and pathologic course. Arch Ophthal. 1946;36:189-214. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 72] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 75] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
25. | Wagoner MD. Chemical injuries of the eye: current concepts in pathophysiology and therapy. Surv Ophthalmol. 1997;41:275-313. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 353] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 328] [Article Influence: 12.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
26. | Morgan SJ. Chemical burns of the eye: causes and management. Br J Ophthalmol. 1987;71:854-857. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 66] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 73] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
27. | Chen SY, Fong PC, Lin SF, Chang CH, Chan CC. A case-crossover study on transient risk factors of work-related eye injuries. Occup Environ Med. 2009;66:517-522. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 21] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 25] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
28. | Macdonald EC, Cauchi PA, Azuara-Blanco A, Foot B. Surveillance of severe chemical corneal injuries in the UK. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93:1177-1180. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 30] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
29. | Tschopp M, Krähenbühl P, Tappeiner C, Kupferschmidt H, Quarroz S, Goldblum D, Frueh BE. Incidence and causative agents of chemical eye injuries in Switzerland. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2015;53:957-961. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
30. | Kılıç Müftüoğlu İ, Aydın Akova Y, Çetinkaya A. Clinical Spectrum and Treatment Approaches in Corneal Burns. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2015;45:182-187. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
31. | Bunker DJ, George RJ, Kleinschmidt A, Kumar RJ, Maitz P. Alkali-related ocular burns: a case series and review. J Burn Care Res. 2014;35:261-268. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 28] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 29] [Article Influence: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
32. | Bhalekar S, Basu S, Lal I, Sangwan VS. Successful autologous simple limbal epithelial transplantation (SLET) in previously failed paediatric limbal transplantation for ocular surface burns. BMJ Case Rep. 2013;2013. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
33. | Wang W, Zhou Y, Zeng J, Shi M, Chen B. Epidemiology and clinical characteristics of patients hospitalized for ocular trauma in South-Central China. Acta Ophthalmol. 2017;95:e503-e510. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 45] [Article Influence: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
34. | Beiran I, Miller B, Bentur Y. The efficacy of calcium gluconate in ocular hydrofluoric acid burns. Hum Exp Toxicol. 1997;16:223-228. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 28] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 29] [Article Influence: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
35. | Atley K, Ridyard E. Treatment of hydrofluoric acid exposure to the eye. Int J Ophthalmol. 2015;8:157-161. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
36. | Islam SS, Nambiar AM, Doyle EJ, Velilla AM, Biswas RS, Ducatman AM. Epidemiology of work-related burn injuries: experience of a state-managed workers' compensation system. J Trauma. 2000;49:1045-1051. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 35] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 36] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
37. | Akgun Z, Palamar M, Egrilmez S, Yagci A, Selver OB. Clinical Characteristics and Severity Distribution of Tertiary Eye Center Attendance by Ocular Chemical Injury Patients. Eye Contact Lens. 2022;48:295-299. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
38. | Adepoju FG, Adeboye A, Adigun IA. Chemical eye injuries: presentation and management difficulties. Ann Afr Med. 2007;6:7-11. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
39. | Haring RS, Sheffield ID, Channa R, Canner JK, Schneider EB. Epidemiologic Trends of Chemical Ocular Burns in the United States. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134:1119-1124. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 63] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 68] [Article Influence: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
40. | Vajpayee RB, Shekhar H, Sharma N, Jhanji V. Demographic and clinical profile of ocular chemical injuries in the pediatric age group. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:377-380. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
41. | Jafari AK, Anvari F, Ameri A, Bozorgui S, Shahverdi N. Epidemiology and sociodemographic aspects of ocular traumatic injuries in Iran. Int Ophthalmol. 2010;30:691-696. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
42. | Al-Ghadeer H, Al Amry M, Aldihan KA, Alobaidan OS, AlQahtani GMS, Khandekar R. Demographic, Clinical Profile and Management Outcomes of Ocular Chemical Injuries in Saudi Children. Clin Ophthalmol. 2022;16:3247-3255. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
43. | Jolly R, Arjunan M, Theodorou M, Dahlmann-Noor AH. Eye injuries in children - incidence and outcomes: An observational study at a dedicated children's eye casualty. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2019;29:499-503. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
44. | Cao H, Li L, Zhang M, Li H. Epidemiology of pediatric ocular trauma in the Chaoshan Region, China, 2001-2010. PLoS One. 2013;8:e60844. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 46] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 46] [Article Influence: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
45. | Gray ME, West CE. Corneal injuries from liquid detergent pods. J AAPOS. 2014;18:494-495. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
46. | Korkmaz I, Palamar M, Egrilmez S, Yagci A, Barut Selver O. Ten Years of Pediatric Ocular Chemical Burn Experience in a Tertiary Eye Care Center in Turkey. Eye Contact Lens. 2022;48:175-179. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
47. | Williams H, Bateman DN, Thomas SH, Thompson JP, Scott RA, Vale JA. Exposure to liquid detergent capsules: a study undertaken by the UK National Poisons Information Service. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2012;50:776-780. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 42] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
48. | Pollard KA, Xiang H, Smith GA. Pediatric eye injuries treated in US emergency departments, 1990-2009. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2012;51:374-381. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 35] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 36] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
49. | Chen AJ, Kim JG, Linakis JG, Mello MJ, Greenberg PB. Eye injuries in the elderly from consumer products in the United States: 2001-2007. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013;251:645-651. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
50. | Akbas E, Korkmaz I, Palamar M, Barut Selver O. Shifting trends in demographic features of chemical eye injuries during COVID-19 pandemic. Int Ophthalmol. 2022;42:2127-2132. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
51. | Das AV, Rao P, Shanbhag S, Singh S, Basu S. Waves of COVID-19 Pandemic: Effect on Ocular Surface Services at a Tertiary Eye Center in India. Cureus. 2021;13:e20719. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
52. | Liang H, Zhang M, Chen M, Lin TPH, Lai M, Chen H. Ocular Trauma During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila). 2022;11:481-487. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
53. | Martin GC, Le Roux G, Guindolet D, Boulanger E, Hasle D, Morin E, Vodovar D, Vignal C, Gabison E, Descatha A; French PCC Research Group. Pediatric Eye Injuries by Hydroalcoholic Gel in the Context of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021;139:348-351. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
54. | Wasser LM, Koppel JH, Zadok D, Berkowitz L, Abulafia A, Heiman E, Aryan A, Roditi E, Weill Y. Pediatric Ocular Injury Due to Hand Sanitizer Exposure: An Emerging Hazard. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2021;37:462-465. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
55. | Al Busaidi A, Mal W, Rafei MA, Al-Yaqoobi A, Panchatcharam S, Al-Mujaini AS. The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Ophthalmic Referrals within a Tertiary Academic Center in Oman. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2021;28:239-244. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
56. | Haring RS, Sheffield ID, Frattaroli S. Detergent Pod-Related Eye Injuries Among Preschool-Aged Children. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017;135:283-284. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |