Glyxambi
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1564
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
   Table of Contents      
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 62  |  Issue : 9  |  Page : 972-973

Authors' Reply


1 Department of Ophthalmology, Kasturba Medical College and Hospital, Manipal University, Manipal, Udupi, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Pediatrics, Kasturba Medical College and Hospital, Manipal University, Manipal, Udupi, Karnataka, India

Date of Web Publication4-Nov-2014

Correspondence Address:
Hazarika Manali
Assistant Professor in Ophthalmology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University, Manipal - 576 104, Udupi, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Rao KA, Jayashree P, Manali H, Raghuvamsi C, Mithun AK. Authors' Reply . Indian J Ophthalmol 2014;62:972-3

How to cite this URL:
Rao KA, Jayashree P, Manali H, Raghuvamsi C, Mithun AK. Authors' Reply . Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Jun 19];62:972-3. Available from: http://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2014/62/9/972/143963

Thank you for the interesting comments on our article on "Analysis of prenatal and postnatal risk factors of retinopathy of prematurity in tertiary care hospital in South India". [1],[2]

In this regard, we wish to clarify the following points:

  1. Our inclusion criteria consisted of the following:

    • Those infants with birth weight <1500 g, irrespective of gestational age, and all infants born at <32 weeks of gestation, irrespective of their birth weight
    • Those infants with a gestational age >32 weeks, with a birth weight between 1500-2000 g were screened at the discretion of the attending neonatologist, as these infants had some factors that increased their risk of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), such as, exposure to oxygen for >30 days, respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis, multiple blood transfusions, multiple births, intraventricular hemorrhage etc.


    This criteria was based on the screening guidelines mentioned in the study by Jalali et al. [3]
  2. We have aimed to analyze the prenatal and postnatal risk factors for the development of severe ROP requiring treatment with a special reference to postnatal weight gain and hence have not explained the laser treatment in detail.


In our series, none of the infants had zone I disease or stage IV or V disease. Nine infants had stage III in zone II (qualifying to be threshold ROP) which were treated promptly. Of the 20 infants who had stage II zone II disease, 17 had type I disease. These infants were followed up more frequently and 7 eventually required treatment, because they progressed. The other 10 regressed. We also treated three infants for persisting new vessels at the edge of zone II and III, beyond 45 weeks.

The diagnostic consistency in plus disease is imperfect [4] and early intervention for zone II stage II plus disease (Type I ROP) is still controversial. [5] It is estimated that if treatment protocol is strictly adhered to in this sub-group, 44% of babies would be treated unnecessarily. It is estimated that 10 eyes must be treated to avoid 1 unfavorable outcome for zone II stage II plus disease. [6] Earlier treatment also means that treating less mature and consequently more unstable babies. [5] In our series, despite having full-fledged neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) backup, four babies out of 19 who underwent treatment, developed respiratory problems which required intervention. It is recommended that the clinical judgment is warranted in treating these babies as more research is needed to prove conclusively about the benefit of early treatment in zone II stage II plus disease. With this in mind, we followed these babies more frequently than treating them immediately. We feel that our stand is justified as 10 (59%) of these babies regressed spontaneously.

 
  References Top

1.
Rao KA, Purkayastha J, Hazarika M, Chaitra R, Adith KM. Analysis of prenatal and postnatal risk factors of retinopathy of prematurity in a tertiary care hospital in South India. Indian J Ophthalmol 2013;61:640-4.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
2.
Krishnan T, Rajyalakshmi R, Radke N, Radke S.Comment: Analysis of prenatal and postnatal risk factors of retinopathy of prematurity in a tertiary care hospital in South India. Indian J Ophthalmol 2014;62:747-8.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
3.
Jalali S, Anand R, Kumar H, Dogra MR, Azad R, Gopal L. Programme planning and screening strategy in retinopathy of prematurity. Indian J Ophthalmol 2003;51:89-97.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
4.
Hewing NJ, Kaufman DR, Chan RV, Chiang MF. Plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity: Qualitative analysis of diagnostic process by experts. JAMA Ophthalmol 2013;131:1026-32.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Sahni J, Subhedar NV, Clark D. Treated threshold stage 3 versus spontaneously regressed subthreshold stage 3 retinopathy of prematurity: A study of motility, refractive, and anatomical outcomes at 6months and 36 months. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:154-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Vander JF, McNamara JA, Tasman W, Brown GC. Revised indication for early treatment of retinopathy of prematurity. Arch Ophthalmol 2005;123:406-7.  Back to cited text no. 6
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed411    
    Printed7    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded70    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal