Does this make sense (eye operation)

  • Thread starter Thread starter SlimSalabim
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the surgical procedures for repairing a torn retina, specifically focusing on the use of a scleral buckle and the role of a gas bubble in supporting the retina. Participants explore the mechanics and theories behind these treatments, questioning their effectiveness and the underlying physics involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their experience with a torn retina and expresses skepticism about the effectiveness of the scleral buckle and the gas bubble theories.
  • Another participant confirms that the scleral buckle is a standard treatment for retinal detachment and provides a link for further information.
  • A participant questions whether a gas bubble can exert more pressure on the retina than water, suggesting that the bubble's role may not be as effective as claimed.
  • Another participant argues that while water is incompressible, air is compressible, which may explain the use of a gas bubble in the procedure.
  • A different participant shares their experience with a similar condition, noting the combination of procedures involved, including vitrectomy and the use of gas or silicone oil, and clarifies the purpose of the gas bubble in preventing further detachment.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness and mechanics of the treatments discussed. There is no consensus on the validity of the theories regarding the gas bubble and scleral buckle, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various procedures and their experiences, indicating potential confusion about the specifics of treatments and the terminology used. There are references to different materials (water, gas, silicone oil) and their roles in the surgical process, but no consensus on the physics involved.

SlimSalabim
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I had a torn retina a few years ago. The procedure to fix it is removing the gel sac and reattaching the retina with a laser. I've heard that the procedures have been changed but even then what they did made wonder if they knew what they were doing.

They sewed a ring around my eyeball to squeeze it which made the eye nearsighted. They then put water and a bubble of air in and I had to stay face down for weeks until the bubble disappeared.

The theory was that the ring squeezing the eyeball puts pressure on the retina. The other theory is that, face down, the bubble presses up against the retina and holds it the back of the eyeball.

Both those theories sound like BS to me.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
SlimSalabim said:
I had a torn retina a few years ago. The procedure to fix it is removing the gel sac and reattaching the retina with a laser. I've heard that the procedures have been changed but even then what they did made wonder if they knew what they were doing.

They sewed a ring around my eyeball to squeeze it which made the eye nearsighted. They then put water and a bubble of air in and I had to stay face down for weeks until the bubble disappeared.

The theory was that the ring squeezing the eyeball puts pressure on the retina. The other theory is that, face down, the bubble presses up against the retina and holds it the back of the eyeball.

Both those theories sound like BS to me.

That is all part of the standard treatment for a detached retina. The ring is called a scleral buckle: http://www.webmd.com/eye-health/scleral-buckling-surgery-for-retinal-detachment

.
 
Thanks, I knew that since I had it done. Maybe I should have posted this in the physics section.

It's physics, I guess I am questioning whether or not a bubble in the eye would actually support or press the retina to the back of the inside of the eyeball. I don't see that happening. I don't see how a bubble would put any more pressure on it than if it was just filled with water.

I also question the ring. Sure squeezing the eye will put pressure on it but the pressure is self regulated by the eye isn't it? It will equalize to nullify the effect of the ring in no time.
 
well water isn't compressible so therefore can't store any elastic potential energy whereas air, compressible, can. so I think that is why they use a bubble.
 
SlimSalabim said:
I had a torn retina a few years ago. The procedure to fix it is removing the gel sac and reattaching the retina with a laser. I've heard that the procedures have been changed but even then what they did made wonder if they knew what they were doing.

They sewed a ring around my eyeball to squeeze it which made the eye nearsighted. They then put water and a bubble of air in and I had to stay face down for weeks until the bubble disappeared.

The theory was that the ring squeezing the eyeball puts pressure on the retina. The other theory is that, face down, the bubble presses up against the retina and holds it the back of the eyeball.

Both those theories sound like BS to me.

I'm a bit confused on this, having recently suffered an open globe injury and retina detachment. What you're describing sounds like a hodgepodge of several different procedures. By removal of the gel sac I'm assuming you mean the vitreous fluid in the eye. That procedure is called vitrectomy and is normally combined with the Scalia buckle. They don't use water from what I was told, instead either a silicon oil that has to be removed later or a gas. The laser procedure, photocoagulation, is not normally done with it, but before or after to burn any other tears and seal them before your vitreous can detach the retina. That procedure is the one I had first, and leaves you blind for about 15 mins and sick to the stomach. I also had the bubble for my detachment, I can't remember what they called that one, but it was because I had a minor tear and detachment in a hard to get to spot. There's no physics invoked really, the bubble floating against the tear in the retina prevents more fluid from seeping in behind it and worsening the detachment, while it floating helps push the retina back up onto the blood vessels so it can attach. I had to remain in a very awkward position for four days, while the body drained the fluid that had leaked behind the retina and it reattached.

I ended up with 20/60 when all was said and done, not bad for taking shrapnel to the eye. Considering that I would have lost it just decades earlier.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K