This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (5)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:675-676.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

CONTROVERSY EXISTS among experienced clinicians as to whether one should ever recommend focal and/or grid photocoagulation for eyes with clinically significant diabetic macular edema and visual acuity of 20/20 or better. When experienced clinicians disagree, there is usually good reason for the disagreement. What information exists to help us decide when, if ever, to recommend such treatment?

The rationale for treating eyes with good visual acuity comes largely from Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) reports. In that study, the demonstration of a beneficial effect of photocoagulation for macular edema was based on the comparison of eyes with mild to moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy and macular edema that were randomly assigned to have either focal and/or grid photocoagulation or no photocoagulation for the macular edema. Comparisons between treated and control group eyes demonstrated that the group assigned to photocoagulation for clinically significant diabetic macular edema had a 50% reduction of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?