Talk:Corneal ulcer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Ophthalmology This article is part of the WikiProject Ophthalmology, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to ophthalmology on Wikipedia. To participate, visit the project page.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Human or Animal Medical Condition?

Is this page about a condition that afflicts humans or dogs? It mentions humas briefly at the beginning, but the rest of the article seems to be vetinary in nature. --Corinthian 00:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Corneal ulcers affect humans, dogs, and other animals. A veterinarian was largely responsible for the creation of this article. -AED 00:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and added a disambiguation to the start of the article, pointing toward corneal abrasion, which discusses corneal ulcers in humans. --Joelmills 03:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Abrasions and ulcers are two different things. Both can affect humans and non-human species. -AED 04:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

They both involve loss of the epithelium, but I guess the definition of corneal ulcers also includes deeper loss of corneal tissue. As far as I know, most of the veterinary community uses the term corneal ulcer when referring to any loss of corneal epithelium. How is a corneal ulcer different than a corneal abrasion in human ophthalmology terminology? Either way it works out, with the significant differences in causes and treatment, I think it is convenient to keep the articles separate. --Joelmills 00:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Abrasion implies physical or mechanical disruption of the epithelium, whereas ulcer implies an inflammatory cause. I would suggest expanding both articles to reflect that each occurs in human and veterinary medicine. AED 00:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. --Joelmills 01:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Refractory corneal ulcers

This is not a synonym for recurrent corneal abrasion or erosion, which is what the author (capably) describes. Because infectious corneal ulcers have a different etiology and are so treated from corneal erosions, this material should be moved out of the ulcer topic.Bticho 18:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming

I think I'm going to be bold and rename this article Corneal ulcers in animals. There is still very little about the human aspect of the condition except for the infobox and a bit about culturing. For now corneal ulcer can redirect here, until someone wants to write an article about the human disease. I know we discussed this earlier and it was decided to keep corneal ulcer and corneal abrasion and their respective human and veterinary information separate, but in veterinary medicine the term corneal ulcer is used whether or not the etiology is inflammatory or traumatic. I don't know who started that trend, but that's the way it is. My concern is that this article is going to confuse anyone looking for information on the human condition. I'll wait a few days for discussion before moving it. --Joelmills 00:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article creation relevant to humans

Thanks for letting me know at the WP:Eye talk pages for the Wikiproject on Ophthalmology. I have removed information concerning the animals, which is appropriately contained in Corneal ulcers in animals. I will try to find some pictures for the article. I need some help with the creation of infobox and referencing, along with general proofreading for grammatical errors thay may have inadvertently crept in. Anybody?! EyeMD T|C 13:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Weird phrasing in the opening

particularly in these sentences:

In developing countries, as well as in Florida, corneal ulcer is frequently the cause of great morbidity as well as economic loss to the person and family. Children afflicted by Vitamin A deficiency are at high risk for corneal ulcer and may become blind in both eyes, which may persist lifelong, causing tremendous & avoidable loss to the person and the society.

Doesn't sound like something you would see when researching information on a medical condition.

[edit] Source / References

While I consider the information contained on this page to be of a good quality, and with a good reasoning detail, I am not aware of where it has been obtained from. The detail is highly specific, possibly supplied from a medical consultant or surgeon. Can the source be ascertained, with reference to a medical journal or publication ? --Minotaur500 01:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just realized that this article contains a lot of what I wrote originally under the title Corneal ulcer and then moved to Corneal ulcers in animals (since it was about corneal ulcers in animals, see above discussion). It looks like when this article was recreated, a lot of what I wrote was added back in, sans citations. That's why refractory corneal ulcers are also referred to as Boxer ulcers (as in Boxer (dog)). So citations are available via Corneal ulcers in animals, but they are all veterinary in nature. I would have to doubt that a lot of that info applies to humans. --Joelmills 02:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the information has been supplied by me, an Eye Surgeon - it is accurate and has got significant clinical details. Referencing is, I believe, AED's forte! He is nowhere to be seen lately.... Let me see if this can posted onto WP:Eye for some referencing expert to help out with.... Cheers! EyeMD T|C 14:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Florida?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Corneal_ulcer&oldid=137511797

Really? Corneal ulcers are common specifically within the state of Florida? That sounds odd. Now, I'm perfectly willing to believe that's true, but then either there is some kind of anecdote that makes this possible and it should be mentioned (e.g. "in Florida where the microscopic Florida Keys eye flea is endemic") or some kind of noted phenomenon that should be cited (e.g. medical studies).

This seems to have been fixed since. It was likely a prank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.226.144 (talk) 06:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)