In all, 48 decompressions were carried out according to the modified decom- 

 pression schedule. The occurrence of pains in one subject represents an 

 incidence of 2°L, which is considerably above the incidence of 0.5% experienced 

 with use of the U.S. Navy Standard Air Decompression Tables. This finding 

 was unexpected and may, of course, be attributable to the difference in decom- 

 pression susceptibility between males and females. However, the subject was 

 trim of figure and a diver of considerable experience, rendering her less 

 liable to dysbarism, one would have thought, than a more obese, less 

 experienced person. 



Furthermore, the decompression tables had been developed on the assumption 

 that the pressure in the habitat would be 42 FSW with a water depth of 

 49 FSW (although the depth was commonly referred to as 50 ft). But the actual 

 pressure in the habitat was found to vary + 0.5 ft from 40 FSW, with a mean 

 value of approximately 40 FSW. The subjects were therefore saturated at an even 

 smaller pressure than the one calculated for in the laboratory tests, which 

 should have made dysbarism even less of a threat. That it occurred in TEKTITE II 

 is but further demonstration of how poorly understood are the physiological 

 effects of saturation diving. 



Bubble formation in the eye during decompression : 



A refractile body had been observed in the eyd of a TEKTITE I aquanaut 

 (although never confirmed as a bubble). In the TEKTITE II program, therefore, 

 the possibility of bubble formation during decompression was taken into full 

 account, and arrangements were made for a postdive ophthalmologic examination 

 by a physician qualified by the American Board of Ophthalmology. 



In the postdive examination following the decompression of Mission 1-50, small 

 refractile bodies were observed in the vitreous media of both eyes of one 

 aquanaut. More refractile bodies were noted in the left eye than in the right. 

 The subject had been aware of no alteration in his vision, and his pre- and 

 postdive visual-acuity tests revealed no change. 



The refractile bodies decreased in number with the passage of time, but were 

 still visualized by Dr. Masson 16 hours after decompression. An examination 

 was made 20 hours postdecompression by an ophthalmologist, who perceived the 

 bodies but was of the opinion that such bodies are not infrequently found in 

 the nonpathological visual media. It should be noted, furthermore, that this 

 subject had suffered a severe attack of iritis and uveitis in the left eye 

 approximately six months before the dive and that the conditions had not 

 resolved completely before the dive. The relationship between them and the 

 disease process can only be a matter of conjecture. 



Commencing with Mission 2-50, ophthalmologic observation was extended to 

 include an ophthalmoscopic examination by Dr. Masson at each 5-FSW decrement 

 during decompression and an examination at Knud-Hansen Hospital two hours 

 later failed to confirm these observations. 



From Mission 3-50 onward, the decompression procedure was changed, and no 

 further refractile bodies were detected, either by direct ophthalmoscopy or 

 slit-lamp study. It might be mentioned that there was no correlation between 

 the observed refractile bodies and complaints of vague, transient joint pains 

 during decompression. 



IX-10 



