Erblindung nach nichtophthalmologischen Eingriffen

Torossian, Alexander; Schmidt, Jan Peter; Schaffartzik, Walter; Wulf, Hinnerk

doi:10.1007/s00101-005-0968-1

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…She began to list heavily … Finally she too disappeared in the waters of the Dardanelles. 32 This paragraph was identified as the most substantial proof of Torossian's lies because, according to British and Turkish official histories, the battleship Bouvet did not sink due to artillery fire, but it hit moored mines laid by the notorious minelayer Nusret ten days before. Sir Julian Corbett's British official naval history published in 1921 told the story like this and it shaped the historiography of the day.…”

Section: Empathy: a Rare Quality Among Historians In Turkeymentioning

confidence: 99%

A rejoinder: the debate on Captain Torossian revisited

Aktar¹

2016

Journal of Genocide Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reading Edhem Eldem's article on the Torossian debate has created in me a sense of déjà vu. In February 2013, he participated in the debate by analysing the documents acquired from Torossian's family. 1 In June 2015, we published an extensive volume on the Captain Torossian debate entitled Tarih, otobiyografi ve hakikat: Yüzbaşı Torosyan tartışması ve Türkiye'de tarihyazımı (History, autobiography and the truth: the Captain Torossian debate and historiography in Turkey). In this edited volume, my long article answered all of the criticisms that he put forward in 2013. 2 Additionally, Taner Akçam, Suavi Aydın and others all replied to him in their lengthy articles. Later, he published a review criticizing the book and attacking me by repeating the same arguments he had used previously. 3 Now I see the same arguments put forward again, this time in English. I decided to supress my sense of déjà vu and reply to his comments. In doing so, I would like to take the opportunity to revisit this untranslatable 'alla turca debate' and make it more comprehensible to the non-Turcophone audience. First, I would like to start with a hypothetical example from British military history. Let us imagine Lieutenant Sean O'Connor was serving in the Royal Dublin Fusiliers and landed at Gallipoli on 25 April 1915. Let us again assume that Lt. O'Connor kept a diary during the campaign. He survives the war, but contracts the Spanish flu and dies in 1919. His diary stays intact for ninety years in a drawer, until his grandson Michael O'Connor discovers it in the attic of his Dublin house. Proud and impressed by his grandfather's prose and displayed heroism, Michael has this diary published in London. If the published version of Lt. O'Connor's account creates some suspicion among military historians because of his unusual critical judgements of rank and file, and sweeping statements on the conduct of the war, then what would the British military historians do?They would simply go to the British National Archives on a fact-finding mission. First, they would check his personnel file in order to understand whether Lt. O'Connor was actually serving in the Royal Dublin Fusiliers. They would then compare his narrative with the daily 'war journals' written by his unit commanders in 1915. They would compare his account with the memoirs of other Irish soldiers published previously. As one can imagine, all documents of the Royal Dublin Fusiliers are preserved and they are open to readers without restrictions.Let us now focus on the story of our protagonist, Sarkis Torossian. He was born in 1893 in Kayseri, Central Anatolia. His family sent him to study in Edirne, where he graduated from Cadets' School (Askeri Rüşdiye). He graduated from the artillery school in 1914 and was sent to Germany for a short period of training. On his return, he was appointed to Gallipoli as an artillery officer at Ertuğrul (fort no. 1). He fought not only in the naval campaign, but later also in land battles during the summer of 1915. Wounded twice during battle, he was pr...

show abstract

Section: Empathy: a Rare Quality Among Historians In Turkeymentioning

confidence: 99%

A rejoinder: the debate on Captain Torossian revisited

Aktar¹

2016

Journal of Genocide Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Devastating ophthalmic complications, including impairment or loss of visual acuity, can result in catastrophic outcomes after cosmetic injections and facial procedures. The incidence of visual loss in general following non-ophthalmic procedures is estimated to range from 0.056% to 1.3%, depending on the type of surgery [ 1 ]; however, permanent visual loss can occur, accounting for 0.0008% [ 2 ]. Several factors increase the risk of ophthalmic complications after non-ophthalmic surgeries, including age and sex, chronic diseases such as long duration in the prone position, excessive blood loss, hypotension, anemia, hypoxia, excessive fluid replacement, use of vasoconstricting agents, elevated venous pressure, head positioning, and a patient-specific vascular susceptibility that may be anatomic or physiologic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ophthalmic Complications of Periorbital and Facial Aesthetic Procedures: A Literature Review

Alharbi,

Bin Dlaim,

Alqahtani

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence and popularity of cosmetic facial procedures may lead to significant ophthalmic complications such as ocular motility dysfunction and visual disability. Here, we present a scoping review to identify common ophthalmic complications in some facial plastic surgeries and cosmetic injections, and to develop clinical approaches for prophylaxis and management in terms of direct attention and awareness of non-ophthalmologists toward such scenarios and appropriate intervention. This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following keywords were used to search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: “facial laser”, “facial fillers”, “facial injections”, “hyaluronic acid”, “local facial injections of botulinum toxin”, “rhinoplasty”, “blepharoplasty blindness”, “ophthalmoplegia”, “diplopia”, “ptosis”, “ophthalmic artery occlusion”, “posterior ciliary artery occlusion”, and “ocular ischemic syndrome”. A total of 37 articles published between 1989 and 2021 were included, of which 21 were case reports. The most common ophthalmic complication was vision loss (0.0008%). The risk of ophthalmic complications including ocular pain, sudden unilateral or bilateral vision loss, flashes of light, ptosis, and ophthalmoplegia increase with injection in common anatomical regions like the glabella, nose, and supraorbital and nasolabial folds. The incidence of adverse events ranges from 5% to 18% in rhinoplasty. The most common complications after blepharoplasty were dry eye syndrome and diplopia, caused by eyelid ptosis. Eyelid, cornea, lens, and retina injuries are ophthalmic complications that occur after facial laser treatment. Ophthalmic complications after non-ophthalmic and cosmetic procedures are becoming increasingly common. The cumulative reported cases of ophthalmic complications after hyaluronic acid filler injection from 2016 to 2020 showed different types of adverse events, with the most common being decreased visual acuity, unilateral vision loss, and ptosis, with varying outcomes of each complication ranging from partial resolution to complete recovery. These complications must be recognized early, and prompt treatment must be established.

show abstract

“…It is associated with cardiac, spine, and head and neck surgery [ 1 ]. POVL's incidence is 0.013% in non-ophthalmic surgery, 0.11% in heart surgery, and 0.2% in spine surgery [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. The most common cause of POVL is optic ischemia, and related factors include prone position, duration of surgery, hypotension, massive bleeding and increased venous pressure.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporary postoperative visual loss associated with intracerebral hemorrhage after laparoscopic appendectomy: a case report

Song

Jun

Guk

2014

Korean J Anesthesiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Postoperative visual loss (POVL) after non-ophthalmic surgery is rare, with a reported incidence ranging from 0.013 to 0.2%. Most perioperative visual loss is associated with spine operations and cardiac bypass procedures. The most common cause of POVL is ischemic optic neuropathy. However, there are no previous reports of postoperative visual loss after laparoscopic appendectomy. A 43-year-old female with no underlying disease underwent laparoscopic appendectomy; the operation was completed in one hour and her blood pressure was stable during the perioperative period. In the post-anesthetic care unit, the patient complained of nausea and headache, but she did not complain of any unusual visual symptoms. Approximately one hour after arriving at the ward, the patient complained of visual disturbance. Neurologic examination revealed left homonymous hemianopsia, and subarachnoid hemorrhage and intracerebral hemorrhage were found in the occipital area on brain MRI.

show abstract

Erblindung nach nichtophthalmologischen Eingriffen

Cited by 12 publications

References 53 publications

A rejoinder: the debate on Captain Torossian revisited

A rejoinder: the debate on Captain Torossian revisited

Ophthalmic Complications of Periorbital and Facial Aesthetic Procedures: A Literature Review

Temporary postoperative visual loss associated with intracerebral hemorrhage after laparoscopic appendectomy: a case report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About