CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by D'Souza, M. G.
Right arrow Articles by Wider, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by D'Souza, M. G.
Right arrow Articles by Wider, T.
Related Collections
Right arrow General Anesthesia

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 47, 1119-1121, Copyright © 2000 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Unilateral mydriasis after nasal reconstruction surgery

MG D'Souza, A Hadzic and T Wider
Department of Anesthesiology, St. Luke's/Roosevelt Hospital Center, New York, NY 10025, USA. mgd11@columbia.edu

PURPOSE: To present a case of iatrogenic, unilateral pupillary dilatation after general anesthesia for nasal surgery. Unilateral pupillary dilatation after general anesthesia has sinister implications, which might prompt further investigations. However, in patients undergoing nasal surgery, it might be caused by the action of drugs injected intranasally. Consideration of iatrogenic causes of pupillary dilatation might help clinicians to avoid time-consuming and costly investigations. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 24-yr-old healthy woman underwent a general anesthetic for septoplasty and bilateral turbinectomy. She was hemodynamically stable and did not suffer any hypoxia intraoperatively. At the end of the operation her right pupil was dilated (8 mm diameter). Her left pupil was normal. No other abnormality was detected. After she woke up, her vision was grossly normal. Neurological examination did not show any other abnormality. Six to eight hours later, both pupils were equal (2 mm in diameter) and reacting normally to light and accommodation. CONCLUSION: The patient was a healthy 24-yr-old who underwent an operation in which there was no incident of hypoxia or hemodynamic instability. Since the patient recovered completely within six to eight hours, the pupillary dilatation was probably caused by epinephrine, which could have entered the eye through the nasolacrimal duct. Although pupillary dilatation after general anesthesia has been described, this is the first case report where the most likely causative agent was epinephrine, injected into the nasal submucosa.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.