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

Stuart R. Seiff, MD
San Francisco, Calif

Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109(5):610.

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

To the Editor.

—I read with interest the article by Joseph et al¹ in the August 1990 issue of the ARCHIVES. I was impressed with their surgical results. I have used a surgical technique similar to theirs but have not had as much success in the patients I selected for such intervention.

Although the article reports therapeutic success in what is often a difficult disease to treat, I am concerned about some of the conclusions drawn by the authors. A major problem with the series is that all of the patients operated on received corticosteroid therapy. The recent retrospective study from San Francisco suggests a beneficial effect of high-dose corticosteroids in these patients.² In the San Francisco study, 13 (62%) of 21 patients treated with steroids had visual improvement. This compares favorably with the 11 (78.6%) of 14 patients treated with steroids and undergoing surgery in the report . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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