This Article  • 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?

Maureen G. Maguire, PhD; Stuart L. Fine, MD; James C. Folk, MD; Neil M. Bressler, MD; Noreen B. Javornik, MS; Judith Alexander; Suresh Chandra, MD; Andrew P. Schachat, MD; Macular Photocoagulation Study Group

Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113(2):138.

	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 thank Dr Tiedeman for his careful reading of our article and his thoughtful comments. As we emphasized in our discussion, advising whether a particular patient should be treated with laser photocoagulation involves consideration of both short- and long-term effects of the treatment and characteristics of the patient such as the condition of the fellow eye. We and Dr Tiedeman are in agreement that the reason that group B patients are good candidates for immediate treatment is the reduced risk for severe loss of vision that begins at 12 months after treatment and endures for at least 3 additional years. This sustained period of lower risk for loss of vision outweighs, in our opinion, the period of increased risk immediately following treatment.

Members of the Macular Photocoagulation Study Group are listed in the April issue of the ARCHIVES on page 482. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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