An excellent historical review of irisinclusion operations is given by Allen.1 Prior to 1900, incarceration of iris, either intentional or accidental, was occasionally noted to have beneficial effect in control of glaucoma. Coccius,* in 1859, observed, "A piece of iris can drain the aqueous to a larger degree than in any other possible way through the cornea." Bader,† in 1881, stated that prolapse of iris in his procedure was a favorable accident; he believed that a conjunctival staphyloma was desirable in that it formed a safety valve for too high tension of the eye. Iris-inclusion operations, however, remained somewhat in disrepute because of the ever-present fear of sympathetic ophthalmia.
An important contribution to the litera ture was made in 1903, by Herbert.2 Having noted that accidental incarceration of the iris after iridectomy seemed to yield a more favorable result, he therefore purposely created a small iris prolapse beneath
HAISTEN MW, GUYTON JS. Iridencleisis: Technique and Results in Ninety-Five Consecutive Operations. AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1959;61(5):727–737. doi:10.1001/archopht.1959.00940090729009
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: