International Consensuses and Guidelines on the Etiology, Diagnosis and Management of Intraocular Foreign Bodies (IOFBs) by the Academy of Asia-Pacific Professors of Ophthalmology (AAPPO), the Asia-Pacific Vitreo-retina Society (APVRS), and the Academia Retina Internationalis (ARI)

作者：Kenneth K. W. Li, Daniel H. T. Wong, Andrea Chor Kiu Au, Nishant Radke, Rupesh Agrawal, Rajvardhan Azad, G. Caputo, Haoyu Chen, Janejit Choovuthayakorn, Taraprasad Das, K C S Fong, Xin Huang, Grant A. Justin, Chi‐Chun Lai, Eun Kyoung Lee, Jennifer I. Lim, Bingsheng Lou, William F. Mieler, Paisan Ruamviboonsuk, Stephanie L. Watson, Hua Yan, Seung Young Yu, Feng Zhang, Dennis S.C. Lam · 发表于：American Journal of Ophthalmology · 年份：2025 · DOI：10.1016/j.ajo.2025.10.002 · 被引用次数：1 · 研究领域：Traumatic Ocular and Foreign Body Injuries、Retinal and Macular Surgery、Intraocular Surgery and Lenses

PURPOSE: To discuss the critical aspects and establish a consensus among experts regarding intraocular foreign bodies (IOFB) management, and to standardize clinical management for IOFB cases in order to ensure consistent and optimal clinical outcomes. DESIGN: A modified Delphi method to reach a consensus among international experts. METHODS: An expert panel was formed by the Academy of Asia-Pacific Professors of Ophthalmology (AAPPO), the Asia-Pacific Vitreo-retina Society (APVRS), and the Academia Retina Internationalis (ARI) to identify the controversy and establish consensus and statement on the management of IOFB. The core group of the panel gathered, reviewed, discussed, and formulated the statements. The statements were rated by the expert panel based on a five-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree). A consensus was reached when at least 75% of the experts voted either "agree" or "strongly agree" for a statement. RESULTS: Twenty four international experts from 11 countries/territories participated. Fifty four consensus statements were reviewed in the following 8 sections: diagnostic controversies, ⁠⁠IOFB characterization controversies, management controversies, prophylactic measures controversies, post-extraction management controversies, special population considerations, outcomes assessment controversies, and future directions. The expert panel showed good agreement in all sections. Consensus was reached for 49 out of 54 st...