|Year : 2023 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 604
An atypical presentation of a pediatric ocular injury associated with remote-control antenna of a toy car
Ranjan P Chandrasekaran1, Prasanna V Ramesh2, Niranjan Karthik Senthil Kumar3, Shruthy V Ramesh4
1 Director, Annai Eye Hospital, Ramanathapuram, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Medical Officer, Department of Glaucoma and Research, Mahathma Eye Hospital Private Limited, Trichy, Tamil Nadu, India
3 Fellow, Department of Comprehensive Ophthalmology, Nirmal Eye Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
4 Medical Officer, Department of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, Mahathma Eye Hospital Private Limited, Trichy, Tamil Nadu, India
|Date of Web Publication||28-Apr-2023|
Prasanna V Ramesh
Mahathma Eye Hospital Private Limited, No. 6, Tennur, Seshapuram, Trichy - 620 017, Tamil Nadu
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Chandrasekaran RP, Ramesh PV, Senthil Kumar NK, Ramesh SV. An atypical presentation of a pediatric ocular injury associated with remote-control antenna of a toy car. Indian J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2023;3:604
|How to cite this URL:|
Chandrasekaran RP, Ramesh PV, Senthil Kumar NK, Ramesh SV. An atypical presentation of a pediatric ocular injury associated with remote-control antenna of a toy car. Indian J Ophthalmol Case Rep [serial online] 2023 [cited 2023 Jun 2];3:604. Available from: https://www.ijoreports.in/text.asp?2023/3/2/604/374985
A 7-year-old boy presented with an injury to his right eye (OD) lower lid due to the recoil of the antenna of the remote of his toy car. On examination, the hook of the antenna was seen buried in the lower forniceal conjunctiva of OD [Figure 1]. Under topical anesthesia, the hook was removed along the direction of entry by the backout method. Ocular injuries have been common among children with toys for quite a long time.,,, Unlike the configuration of the fish hook, the remote antenna does not have a barb to offer resistance to mechanical removal. Thus, it is important to keep in mind the mode and material of injury for treating the patient appropriately.
|Figure 1: (a) Clinical image of the right eye showing the tip of the remote's antenna embedded into the lower conjunctival fornix. (b) Image of a remote-control with a curved antenna and a sharp tip (Red arrow)|
Click here to view
Declaration of patient consent
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Adekoya BJ, Balogun BG, Balogun MM. Could a burst toy balloon cause a major ocular injury like cataract in a child? A case report. Orient J Med 2012;24:49-52.
Hayes R, Dai S. Ocular injuries from gel blasters: Not just a harmless toy. BMJ Case Rep 2019;12:e229629.
Raoof N, Chan TKJ, Rogers NK, Abdullah W, Haq I, Kelly SP, et al
. 'Toy' laser macular burns in children. Eye (Lond) 2014;28:231-4.
Yang U, Greer C, Kim J, Nagiel A. Ocular trauma from toy guns with foam projectiles in 4 children. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2020;59:92-4.