You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
letter
Frequency-doubled Nd:YAG (532 nm green) versus diode laser (810 nm) in treatment of retinopathy of prematurity
  1. G Sanghi1,
  2. M R Dogra1,
  3. A Vinekar1,2,
  4. A Gupta1
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, Advanced Eye Center, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
  2. 2Pediatric Retina Service, Narayana Nethralaya Postgraduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Bangalore, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mangat R Dogra, Department of Ophthalmology, Advanced Eye Center, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector 12, Chandigarh-160 012, India; drmangatdogra{at}sify.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2009.168583

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Diode (810 nm) laser photocoagulation using the indirect ophthalmoscopic delivery system is the preferred modality for treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).1 2 Previously, an argon green laser (488–528 nm) was used for treatment but was reported to have a higher incidence of cataract and was not popular.3 A frequency-doubled Nd:YAG laser (532 nm green) is commonly used for treatment of retinal vascular disorders. However, its use for treatment of ROP is anecdotal4 and has not been compared with that of a standard diode laser. The purpose of this study was to compare both these laser frequencies in treatment of ROP.

    Methods

    A retrospective chart review of infants treated with a laser for ROP at a tertiary care centre was done to retrieve various parameters including spectrum of ROP, type of laser used, laser parameters, complications of treatment, retreatment rate and outcome. This study included infants born at our centre and …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.