You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | RSS | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 112 No. 1, January 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Online Only
 •  Online First Table of
Contents
  Correspondence
 •Online Features
 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
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Delicious Add to Digg Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Ganciclovir Intraocular Device and Patient Survival-Reply

Rajiv Anand, MD; Stephen D. Nightingale, MD; Richard H. Fish, MD
Dallas, Tex

Thomas J. Smith, MD
Boston, Mass

Paul Ashton, PhD
Lexington, Ky

Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112(1):20-21.

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

In reply

We appreciate the insightful remarks of Dr Spaide and of Dr Geier and colleagues regarding the use of the ganciclovir-containing intraocular device for the control of progressive CMV retinitis. The issue that both of these letters raise is exceedingly important regarding survival of patients with AIDS-associated CMV retinitis.

Our report presented the results of an initial pilot study regarding the safety and efficacy of a ganciclovircontaining device that would deliver the drug intraocularly over a long period of time.1 We would like to emphasize that the study was not designed to evaluate the effect on patients' survival. We recruited patients who had active, progressive CMV retinitis in one or both eyes. Patients with symptomatic, systemic CMV infection or visual acuity of less than 20/200 due to macular scarring or optic nerve involvement were excluded. Our only end point was the determination of the effect of the slow . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | PHYSICIAN JOBS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1994 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.