Loss of sight from loss of blood / by George H. Oliver, assistant surgeon, Royal Eye and Ear Hospital, Bradford.

  • Oliver, George Henry.
Date:
1913
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Loss of sight from loss of blood / by George H. Oliver, assistant surgeon, Royal Eye and Ear Hospital, Bradford. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Leeds Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Leeds Library.

    3/8
    LOSS OF SIGHT FROM LOSS OF BLOOD. By GEORGE H. OLIVER, D.O.Oxon., M.R.C.S.Eng, L.R.C.RLond., Assistant Surgeon, Royal Eye and Ear Hospital, Bradford. That loss of blood may be followed by disturbance of vision varying in degree from slight transient amblyopia to absolute and permanent blindness has been known for many years. Attention was first drawn to this subject by Fontanus 270 years ago, who recorded a case in which a man was bled from the medium cephalic vein to the extent of 6 ounces; he lost the sight of the right eye completely during the venesection, but ultimately recovered it. Since then many cases have been recorded. Some time ago an energetic ophthalmic surgeon collected all the cases recorded during the last 275 years, a total of 106. An examination of their histories showed that partial or complete blindness may follow a sudden loss of blood from almost any cause. Among the cases 36 per cent, occurred in haemorrhage from the intestinal tract, 25 per cent, from uterine haemorrhage. Artificial bleeding: phlebotomy accounted for 25 per cent., epistaxis 7 per cent., wounds 5 per cent., and haemoptysis and urethral haemorrhage each 1 per cent. In recurring haemorrhages results vary. A primary loss may have no deleterious effect on vision, while later though smaller haemorrhages may lead to complete loss of vision in both eyes. Further, the visual acuity may get less and less with each renewal of the haemorrhage, with intermitting slight improvements as in a case recorded by Hutchinson in the Ophthalmic Hospital reports; or each attack may be followed by blindness from which the patient recovers, or a later haemorrhage may hav7e no effect at all on vision. It is well to add that most persons whose vision is affected by loss of blood are in bad health. Perfectly healthy people who suffer a sudden loss, such as soldiers in battle, experience no disturbance of vision, at least so far as I can gather no such case is recorded. Most of the patients are over 40: the youngest was two, the oldest 77. In haematemesis twice as many men are affected as women; the amaurosis is bilateral, as a rule, and of equal intensity in both eyes. In 10 per cent, to 15 per cent, one eye alone is affected. In about two-thirds of all diseases there is bilateral amaurosis