Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

COMMENTS ON GOLDBERG ET AL'S ARTICLE IN DECEMBER 1968 ISSUE

COMMENTS ON GOLDBERG ET AL'S ARTICLE IN DECEMBER 1968 ISSUE This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables. Abstract To the Editor. —I would like to take issue with Goldberg et al's interpretation of the topical 2.5% methacholine test, as given in their article entitled, "Ophthalmologic Studies of Familial Dysautonomia" (80:732-743 [Dec] 1968). Topical 2.5% methacholine instilled in an eye with an intact corneal epithelial barrier does not cause pupillary constriction in the normal eye, and does cause pupillary constriction in the parasympathetically denervated iris (Adie's).However, in patients with familial dysautonomia, the corneal epithelial barrier is not normal. The effect of both the alacrimia and the corneal anesthesia is to break down the corneal epithelial barrier, and, therefore, allow greater penetration of topical medications. Thus, 2.5% methacholine, if it penetrates easily, can cause constriction of the normally innervated pupil, and, therefore, cannot be unequivocably interpreted as indicating sphincter denervation in familial dysautonomia.This is borne out further by several facts: The pupil in familial dysautonomia does http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Ophthalmology American Medical Association

COMMENTS ON GOLDBERG ET AL'S ARTICLE IN DECEMBER 1968 ISSUE

Archives of Ophthalmology , Volume 81 (4) – Apr 1, 1969

COMMENTS ON GOLDBERG ET AL'S ARTICLE IN DECEMBER 1968 ISSUE

Abstract

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables. Abstract To the Editor. —I would like to take issue with Goldberg et al's interpretation of the topical 2.5% methacholine test, as given in their article entitled, "Ophthalmologic Studies of Familial Dysautonomia" (80:732-743 [Dec] 1968). Topical 2.5% methacholine instilled in an eye with an intact corneal epithelial barrier does not cause...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/comments-on-goldberg-et-al-s-article-in-december-1968-issue-P3QlSBZ0Gi

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1969 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0003-9950
eISSN
1538-3687
DOI
10.1001/archopht.1969.00990010603030
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables. Abstract To the Editor. —I would like to take issue with Goldberg et al's interpretation of the topical 2.5% methacholine test, as given in their article entitled, "Ophthalmologic Studies of Familial Dysautonomia" (80:732-743 [Dec] 1968). Topical 2.5% methacholine instilled in an eye with an intact corneal epithelial barrier does not cause pupillary constriction in the normal eye, and does cause pupillary constriction in the parasympathetically denervated iris (Adie's).However, in patients with familial dysautonomia, the corneal epithelial barrier is not normal. The effect of both the alacrimia and the corneal anesthesia is to break down the corneal epithelial barrier, and, therefore, allow greater penetration of topical medications. Thus, 2.5% methacholine, if it penetrates easily, can cause constriction of the normally innervated pupil, and, therefore, cannot be unequivocably interpreted as indicating sphincter denervation in familial dysautonomia.This is borne out further by several facts: The pupil in familial dysautonomia does

Journal

Archives of OphthalmologyAmerican Medical Association

Published: Apr 1, 1969

There are no references for this article.