We read with great interest the article by Mataftsi A et al.1
We congratulate the authors for providing insights into the use of
punctal plugs in children. We would like to articulate a few of
our observations.
In seven cases where a secondary procedure was undertaken like a
subconjunctival steroid injection or placement of contact lens, we
believe these would be confounding factors in the final analysis
even if we presume that this was a combination effect and not
replacing one another?
30/64 (46.8%) of the plugs had spontaneous extrusion and these
figures should have been highlighted in a clearer way. It would
be of interest to know the additive effects of bipunctal versus
monopunctal occlusion as well as the results of those who
underwent a repeat punctal occlusion.
We once again congratulate the authors for highlighting the beneficial
effects of this therapeutic modality and for their commendable
work.
We read with great interest the article by Mataftsi A et al.1 We congratulate the authors for providing insights into the use of punctal plugs in children. We would like to articulate a few of our observations. In seven cases where a secondary procedure was undertaken like a subconjunctival steroid injection or placement of contact lens, we believe these would be confounding factors in the final analysis even if we presume that this was a combination effect and not replacing one another? 30/64 (46.8%) of the plugs had spontaneous extrusion and these figures should have been highlighted in a clearer way. It would be of interest to know the additive effects of bipunctal versus monopunctal occlusion as well as the results of those who underwent a repeat punctal occlusion. We once again congratulate the authors for highlighting the beneficial effects of this therapeutic modality and for their commendable work.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared