Talk:Cataract

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cataract is either included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article is on a subject of Top-importance within Medicine.

This article is part of a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's articles related to ophthalmology. See WikiProject Ophthalmology and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.

Contents 1 Comment 2 Split 3 Satan 4 Conditions linked? 5 literary meaning? 6 Redundant 7 Comparison photos 8 Electricians 9 Image 10 If left untreated? 11 Example image erroneous! 12 PGCFA.org

[edit] Comment

Cataract is one of the most common pathological conditions of the elderly. Nearly everyone over 60 has some sign of cataract and 50% of those aged 70 and above have some visual loss due to cataract.

Cataract surgery is the most common surgery performed in the United States in the medicare population. It is generally safe and effective. The cataractous natural lens is removed by an ultrasound technique requiring an incision of about 2.6mm in length in the cornea. Visual rehabilitation is greatly aided by the placement of an artificial plastic lens in the eye at the time of surgery. Typically, patients will wear glasses at least part time after cataract surgery, but relatively good vision can be achieved without correction.

The prinicipal risk of cataract surgery is retinal detachment, which has an incidence of about 1/2% to 1%. The risk period for retinal detachment runs five years after the day of surgery. If a detachment should occur, it is imperative that the patient recognize what has happened and seek treatment immediately, certainly within 24 hours. Symptoms of retinal detachment include flashes of light, black spots in the vision and a "curtain" or cloud coming over the vision. The cloud starts in the peripheral vision and progresses centrally, often in a matter of hours. All symptoms are in one eye only. Vision out of the other eye is unaffected. There is no pain involved.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.241.89.48 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 11 July 2004 (UTC).

Previously, polymethylmethacrylate was used as the lens material. Advances have brought about the use of silicone acrylate which is a soft material. This allows the lens to be folded and injected into the eye through a smaller incision.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.113.209.180 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 21 December 2004 (UTC).

[edit] Split

This needs to be split. What should we call the other article? Cataract (geography)? Cataract (rivers)? Cataract (geology)? Suggestions? – Quadell ^(talk) 00:24, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Satan

I removed:

Humans with cataracts were accused of being possessed by Satan during the Middle Ages.

Briefly Googling for the terms "cataract", "satan" and various other combinations only yielded this very page. Unless proof can be brought, I doubt this should remain on the page. JFW | T@lk 22:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conditions linked?

AED, wouldn't it be great to list here the medical conditions linked to cataract. I can think of myotonic dystrophy and a coupla others, but a nice list (with the type of cataract they induce) would be very useful. JFW | T@lk 22:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• Great idea, doctor! I'll add it to my "To do" list and see what I can do. AED 22:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] literary meaning?

what is the literary meaning of cataract?

[edit] Redundant

This passage was redundant. And somewhat contradictory.

Some cataract formation is to be expected in any person over the age of 70. Fully half of all people between the ages of 65 and 74 and about 70% of those over 75 have some cataract formation.

I removed the first sentence to improve it.JordeeBec 19:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparison photos

Why does a cataract remove the color from the image?--Light current 21:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Any answers?--Light current 17:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Nope, the colour perception is not so remarkably altered in all patients, as shown in the images. In fact, there needs to be an actual artist's rendition of the before and after cataract surgery visual changes, to actually convey the difference. EyeMD 20:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I dont know how the color got removed. Perhaps the original uploader could replace the color.?--Light current 20:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electricians

Why are electricians susceptible to cataracts? Ive not heard this one B4! 8-?--Light current 21:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Im going to remove ref to electricians unless someone comes up with a reason for their susceptibility.--Light current 04:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the EyeMD could comment on this also?--Light current 20:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Although a number of sources report that electrical shocks or currents passing close to the eyes can cause cataracts, I don't know if the incidence and prevalence of cataracts in electricians has been specifically examined. -AED 21:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Can someone fix the placement of the images? Right now it looks horrible. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 18:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• I agree - the editors who have moved around the images: Lightcurrent, kindly refrain from such changes which affect the readability and look of the article. Have a look at my revision and image placement was well, almost perfect then. Why did you change the image placements from good to bad? EyeMD 02:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Good and bad are subjective words. It must be your monitor resolution. The way I changed it looked perfect on my screen (1024 X 768), with the no cataract view to the left of the 'cataract' view. As it is now its OK when the contents box is open, but when its closed, the 'cataract' and 'no cataract' views are disordereed. I dont know how to alter this to everyones satisfaction as its a function of the way the Wiki works! 8-|--Light current 10:13, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the eye X sect pic into the surgery para as there were too many images at the top of the page cuasing formatting problems. Please report if any problems on your screens!--Light current 22:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I like it this way, too. -AED 00:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

On my setup (Firefox 1.5, 1024x768 resolution) the "cataract" view appears on top of the "no cataract" view. Shouldn't the "no cataract" view come first? 68.102.127.239 17:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah Im just hoping its OK on all resolution screens. Its difficult to tell without changing my video setup!--Light current 01:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] If left untreated?

This article dwells at length on treatment of cataracts, but leaves unstated what can be expected if cataracts go untreated. Do people go fully blind? after how long? in what percentage of cases? Perhaps it seems too obvious a point, but it deserves discussion. QuartierLatin1968 16:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Good points. I've rewritten the opening to address a couple of them. -AED 17:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion - added some more points on untreated cataracts. EyeMD 20:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Example image erroneous!

Color vision is not lost, only impaired, so the image should not be black & white. There are color versions on the NIH pages, someone familiar with this subject ought to do something about this, and the other b&w examples, too! --Janke | Talk 17:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC) PS: Fixed temporarily, could one of the regular editors of "eye stuff" look into the whole series, and get the right size images, please? --Janke | Talk 17:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PGCFA.org

I have remove this link because the site doesn't look notable. The WHOIS record seems to go to a maildrop. If someone can vouch for them, please feel free to put it back, but in the meantime, I think it violates WP:EL. --Mdwyer 21:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)