Power topography of magnetic fields of V.V. Volkov’s tips and 25G caliber to permanent eye magnet

Written by Kulikov A.N., Churashov S.V., Mikhin A.A., Ilyuschenkov D.S., Troynovsky R.L.

  UDK: 617.7–001.4–003.6:537.624.3–028.77 | DOI: 10.17238/PmJ1609-1175.2019.2.73–76 | Pages: 73–76 | Full text PDF | Open PDF 


Objective: to compare topography and intensity of a magnetic field of tips of different length to permanent eye magnet and to determine optimum operating parameters.
Methods: We have studied magnetic-field distribution of V.V. Volkov’s tips and 25G caliber of different length to a permanent eye magnet. We used methods of visualization of magnetic lines of force with powder of PZHR brand (dispersed iron powder) 3.200.2 and magnetic tape-visualizer. To measure intensity of magnetic field we used ‘Gauss Meter SH1-8’.
Results: Magnetic field distribution projected to two-dimensional surface was 29 sq.mm for V.V. Volkov’s tip, and for 25G caliber tips of 30, 35, 40 mm it was 10, 8, 4.5, 3 mm2, respectively. Amplitude of magnetic field at the top of the tips along the axis and at the lateral surface differed. Intensity of magnetic field at the lateral surface was higher that along the axis in standard tip, and in the tip of 25G caliber, 30 mm. Intensity of magnetic field at the top was higher than at the lateral surface in tips of 25G caliber, 35, 40, and 45 mm.
Conclusions: Intensity of magnetic field at the lateral surface of 25G caliber tips is higher than along the sagittal axis near the top, and line of forces are concentrated on the top as compared to V.V. Volkov’s tips. It makes possible to anchor a foreign body with the tip of the instrument. The longer tip length contributes to better retention of foreign bodies on the tip without slipping to the tip base and directly to the permanent magnet. The optimal ratio of the magnetic field strength along the axial and lateral surfaces was recorded for a 25G caliber tip with a length of 35 mm.

Links to authors:

A.N. Kulikov1, S.V. Churashov1, A.A. Mikhin1, D.S. Ilyuschenkov2, R.L. Troynovsky1
1 S.M. Kirov Military Medical Academy (6 Akademika Lebedevs St. Saint Petersburg 194044 Russian Federation),
2 Ioffe Institute (26 Politehnicheskaya St. Saint Petersburg 194021 Russian Federation)

1. Boiko E.V., Churashov S.V., Alyabyev M.V. Rendering of primary health care to patients with trauma of visual organ // Military Medical Magazin. 2013. Vol. 334, No. 12. P. 17–26.
2. Boiko E.V., Churashov S.V., Kulikov A.N. Modern micro-invasive surgery and advances in the treatment of open eye injury // X congress of ophthalmologists: Collection of scientific materials. Moscow, 2015. P. 221
3. Boiko E.V., Shishkin M.M., Churashov S.V., Vitreoretinal surgery in the treatment of combat open eye injury // Vestnik of Russian military medical Academy. 2006. No. 2. P. 48–52.
4. Volkov V.V. Open eye injury. St Petersburg: Military Medical Academy, 2016. 280 p.
5. Volkov V.V., Troynovsky R.L., Shishkin M.M. [et al.]. Modern principles of primary ophthalmosurgical care for open injury to the eyeball // Ophthalmic Surgery. 2003. No. 1. P. 10–16.
6. Dambite G.R. Eye metallosis and its treatment. Moscow: Medicine, 1971. 81 p.
7. Danilichev V.F., Shishkin M.M. Modern tactics of surgical treatment of combat gunshot eye damage // Military Medical Magazin. 1997. No. 5. P. 22–26.
8. Kulikov A.N., Sosnovsky S.V., Churashov S.V., Mikhin A.A. Magnetic IOFB removing in open globe injury using 25G magnet in vitreoretinal surgery // Modern Technologies in Ophthalmology. 2018. No. 1. P. 230–232.
9. Eye injuries / eds by R.A. Gundorova, V.V. Neroev, V.V. Kashnikova. Moscow % GEOTAR-Media, 2009. 560 p.


Founded in 1997  |  Editions in a year: 4, Articles in one issue: 30 |  ISSN of print version: 1609-1175  |  Ind.: 18410 (Agency "Rospechat’")  |  Edition: 1000 c.