25 August 2026
: Case report
[In Press] Extracting the Unexpected: A 35-mm Curved Nail as an Intraocular Foreign Body
Unusual clinical course, Diagnostic / therapeutic accidents, Management of emergency care
Rahaf A. Afandi1ABCDEF, Najla A. Hafeezullah1BCDF, Maher A. Aljohani1BCDE, Adel S. Alahmadi1ACDEFDOI: 10.12659/AJCR.953181
Am J Case Rep In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.953181
Available online: 2026-08-25, In Press, Corrected Proof
Publication in the "In-Press" formula aims at speeding up the public availability of the pending manuscript while waiting for the final publication. The assigned DOI number is active and citable. The availability of the article in the Medline, PubMed and PMC databases as well as Web of Science will be obtained after the final publication according to the journal schedule
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Management of posterior segment intraocular foreign bodies is challenging, requiring the preservation of ocular integrity and restoring vision. Traumatic endophthalmitis occurs in 7% to 13% of penetrating injuries, particularly with coexisting intraocular foreign bodies. Managing posterior segment intraocular foreign bodies poses significant challenges due to their complex clinical presentation and the need to achieve multiple goals during treatment. This unusual case of a large metallic intraocular foreign body associated with traumatic cataract, retinal detachment, and endophthalmitis underscores the challenges of diagnosis and management.
CASE REPORT
A 31-year-old man presented with pain and vision loss in the left eye 7 days after penetrating trauma by a metallic foreign body. Examination showed visual acuity 20/20 (logMAR 0.00) in the right eye and hand movement (logMAR 3) in the left. There was a full-thickness inferior 2-mm corneal laceration with iris incarceration, anterior chamber reaction with fibrinous exudation, and a traumatic cataract, with no retinal view. Imaging confirmed the presence of an intraocular foreign body and endophthalmitis with an associated rhegmatogenous retinal detachment at the time of vitrectomy. The 35-mm foreign body was successfully removed. However, the intraocular foreign body was not detected initially on B-scan ultrasonography, reflecting the diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, as well as the importance of computed tomography imaging.
CONCLUSIONS
This case report highlights the complexity of managing a large retained intraocular foreign body, underscoring the rarity of its size, complicated by endophthalmitis, traumatic cataract, and rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, emphasizing the importance of multimodal imaging, individualized treatment approaches, and continued research to improve management of similar conditions.
Keywords: Cataract; Endophthalmitis; Eye Injuries, Penetrating; Intraocular Foreign Bodies; Retinal Detachment; Vitrectomy
In Press
Case report
Am J Case Rep In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.953653
Case report
Am J Case Rep In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.952921
Case report
Am J Case Rep In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.953836
Case report
Am J Case Rep In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.953506
Most Viewed Current Articles
07 Dec 2021 : Case report
22,773,072
DOI :10.12659/AJCR.934347
Am J Case Rep 2021; 22:e934347
06 Dec 2021 : Case report
179,002
DOI :10.12659/AJCR.934406
Am J Case Rep 2021; 22:e934406
21 Jun 2024 : Case report
122,896
DOI :10.12659/AJCR.944371
Am J Case Rep 2024; 25:e944371
07 Mar 2024 : Case report
67,375
DOI :10.12659/AJCR.943133
Am J Case Rep 2024; 25:e943133






