[Skip to Navigation]
July 15, 1911


Author Affiliations


JAMA. 1911;LVII(3):218-219. doi:10.1001/jama.1911.04260070222016

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


ABSTRACT OF DISCUSSION  Dr. Edward Jackson, Denver: There is only one point on which I would be inclined to modify Dr. Donovan's teaching. From my experience I would be inclined not to make the exception of waiting for an inflamed eye, or not make that a very general exception. I think I was induced to try it first by a patient living at a distance and felt under the necessity of going home. But since that I have done it several times intentionally when there was not any such reason, simply because of the good result in the first case, and that is in an eye that shows a good deal of general reaction and is pretty severely inflamed a few days after such injury, entirely a part from any foreign bodies, when it is simply a perforating injury with disturbance of the lens. In such an instance I think

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview