Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 22 March 2016
- Published on: 22 March 2016
- Published on: 22 March 2016
- Published on: 22 March 2016Re:Re:Efficacy of Silicone Punctal Plugs in ChildrenShow More
We thank Dr Shoaib for his comments. In the results we clearly state 'The indication for insertion was based on the presence of ocular surface changes and poor tear film meniscus, with a previous unsuc- cessful management by lubrication and topical medication alone. Overall, 18 of the 25 patients had a concurrent systemic disorder (table 1).' Schirmer's test is , we believe , a poor test for dry eye in children. It often r...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 22 March 2016Re:Efficacy of Silicone Punctal Plugs in ChildrenShow More
We thank Drs Hanovar and Ali for their comments. The main impetus for publishing this data was to show that children are NOT prone to infections with this strategy. In fact while steroid injections were given in cases of severe corneal neovascularisation such as K.I.D. syndrome and ectodermal hypoplasia , the fact that no child got a canaliculitis or other infection even when steroids were used, re-affirms that infection i...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 22 March 2016Re:Efficacy of Silicone Punctal Plugs in ChildrenShow More
A Mataftsi et al1 published an interesting article regarding punctal plugs in children. One of their aim was to establish the efficacy however they have not mentioned any test (Schirmer, Tear film break-up time, Rose Bengal staining, osmolarity) to confirm the diagnosis of dry eye and to calibrate the tear deficiency. It was only the clinical impression (flouresein staining is not specific for dry eyes and therefore cann...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.