TL;DR: Attention is drawn to the lasting visual damage which can follow a solar retinal burn, to stress the inadequacy or ineffectiveness of most socalled protective measures, and to advocate increasing public awareness of the possible dangers of sungazing to reduce the incidence of this avoidable and potentially serious form of eye injury.
Abstract: The possibility of visual damage after direct observation of the sun has been known since ancient times and the clinical features of solar retinopathy have been well described (DukeElder, I954). Eclipse watching is the commonest cause of solar retinopathy, but this form of eye injury has also been described in flying personnel, gunners and air observers (Flynn, 1952), as a result of religious rituals involving observation of the sun (Das, Nirankari, and Chaddah, I956), after sunbathing (Ridgway, I967), and after the application of the Bates method for strengthening the eye-sight (Knudtzon, I948). Cases of deliberate self-inflicted retinal damage against a background of mental illness and drug-taking have recently been described by Eigner (I966) and Gilkes (I968). When viewing conditions are suitable, each solar eclipse is still followed by cases of solar retinopathy. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to the lasting visual damage which can follow a solar retinal burn, to stress the inadequacy or ineffectiveness of most socalled protective measures, and to advocate increasing public awareness of the possible dangers of sungazing so that the incidence of this avoidable and potentially serious form of eye injury may be reduced.
TL;DR: This is the first report to characterize solar retinopathy in a primary eye care population and management includes correct differentiation from other macular disorders, acquisition of a careful detailed history, and provision of patient education regarding the dangers of sungazing.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Most reports of solar retinopathy describe epidemics of patients who go to the eye doctor after viewing a solar eclipse. Rarely is it encountered by the primary eye care provider during a routine eye examination. METHODS: For 26 months, patients who went to the primary care eye clinic and found to have macular lesions consistent with solar retinopathy were identified from the total clinic population. These patients were documented in a coded log and fundus photographs were obtained (when possible). RESULTS: Twenty-six eyes of twenty patients (0.14% incidence) were determined to have macular lesions consistent with solar retinopathy. Visual acuity was 20/25 or better in 100% of the patients and 85% were 20/20. Patients were predominantly men (75%) of middle age (average age, 43 years; SD, 11 years) with a history relevant for solar retinopathy (80%)--consisting of sungazing, 60%; looking at welding light without eye protection, 15%; substance abuse, 15%; and psychiatric condition, 5%. Forty percent had solar lesions in both eyes. Amsler grid testing revealed a defect in only 20%, and macular threshold visual-field testing was normal in all the eyes tested. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report to characterize solar retinopathy in a primary eye care population. Management includes correct differentiation from other macular disorders, acquisition of a careful detailed history, and provision of patient education regarding the dangers of sungazing.
TL;DR: There was full resolution of symptoms in the left eye; however, a central scotoma persisted in the right eye at follow-up 1 year later, and retinal pigment epithelial defects at both fovea improved over time.
Abstract: A young woman presented with a 2-day history of bilateral central scotoma and metamorphopsia following an episode of direct sun-gazing lasting 1–2 min. On examination, visual acuity was reduced to 6/9 bilaterally. Fundal examination revealed discrete yellow lesions at both maculae consistent with solar burns. Optical coherence tomography revealed retinal pigment epithelial defects at both fovea, which improved over time. The patient was managed conservatively. There was full resolution of symptoms in the left eye; however, a central scotoma persisted in the right eye at follow-up 1 year later
TL;DR: Visual acuity was damaged, gentle central scotoma in automated perimetry (Octopus) was presented same as lower A wave in ERG and small macular hyperfluorescence in fluorescein angiography.
Abstract: Two patients with macula damage following sungazing are reported. Visual acuity was damaged, gentle central scotoma in automated perimetry (Octopus) was presented same as lower A wave in ERG and small macular hyperfluorescency in fluorescein angiography. Funduscopy findings were macular changes similar to macular semirupture. In one month all pathologic symptoms disappeared. The only safe prevention is that by Mylar folia that completely prevent eye injury from sungazing.