RESUMEN
PURPOSE: While generally reducing morbidity and mortality, TASER® electrical weapons have risks associated with their usage, including burn injuries and head and cervical trauma associated with uncontrolled falls. The primary non-fatal complications appear to be significant eye injury but no analysis of the mechanisms or suggested treatments has been published. METHODS: We used a biomechanical model to predict the risk of eye injury as a function of distance from the weapon muzzle to the eye. We compared our model results to recently published epidemiological findings. We also describe the typical presentation and suggest treatment options. RESULTS: The globe rupture model predicted that a globe rupture can be expected (50% risk) when the eye is within 6â¯m of the muzzle and decreases rapidly beyond that. This critical distance is 9â¯m for lens and retinal damage which is approximately the range of the most common probe cartridges. Beyond 9â¯m, hyphema is expected along with a perforation by the dart portion of the probe. Our prediction of globe rupture out to 6â¯m (out of a typical range of 9â¯m) is consistent with the published risk of enucleation or unilateral blindness being 69⯱â¯18%, with an eye penetration. CONCLUSIONS: Significant eye injury is expected from a penetration by an electrical weapon probe at close range. The risk decreases rapidly at extended distances from the muzzle. Not all penetrating globe injuries from electrical weapon probes will result in blindness.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones por Armas Conductoras de Energía/patología , Lesiones Oculares Penetrantes/patología , Adolescente , Adulto , Fenómenos Biomecánicos , Ceguera/etiología , Ceguera/patología , Enucleación del Ojo , Lesiones Oculares Penetrantes/etiología , Femenino , Balística Forense , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos Biológicos , Policia/legislación & jurisprudencia , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
In vitro studies reveal that nuclear receptor coactivators enhance the transcriptional activity of steroid receptors, including estrogen (ER) and progestin receptors (PR), through ligand-dependent interactions. Whereas work from our laboratory and others shows that steroid receptor coactivator-1 (SRC-1) is essential for efficient ER and PR action in brain, very little is known about receptor-coactivator interactions in brain. In the present studies, pull-down assays were used to test the hypotheses that SRC-1 from hypothalamic and hippocampal tissue physically associate with recombinant PR or ER in a ligand-dependent manner. SRC-1, from hypothalamus or hippocampus, interacted with PR-A and PR-B in the presence of an agonist, but not in the absence of ligand or in the presence of a selective PR modulator, RU486. Interestingly, SRC-1 from brain associated more with PR-B, the stronger transcriptional activator, than with PR-A. In addition, SRC-1 from brain, which was confirmed by mass spectrometry, interacted with ERalpha and ERbeta in the presence of agonist but not when unliganded or in the presence of the selective ER modulator, tamoxifen. Furthermore, SRC-1 from hypothalamus, but not hippocampus, interacted more with ERalpha than ERbeta, suggesting distinct expression patterns of other cofactors in these brain regions. These findings suggest that interactions of SRC-1 from brain with PR and ER are dependent on ligand, receptor subtype, and brain region to manifest the pleiotropic functional consequences that underlie steroid-regulated behaviors. The present findings reveal distinct contrasts with previous cell culture studies and emphasize the importance of studying receptor-coactivator interactions using biologically relevant tissue.