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

Learn More →

Implantation vs Exploitation

Implantation vs Exploitation 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 have read with interest Dr Paul Henkind's letter in the June 1977 Archives, entitled: "Tilting at Windmills" (95:1083-1084). In this letter, Dr Henkind surveys the ethical and surgical problems that are associated with lens implantation and, to a lesser extent, with phacoemulsification. Although he asserts: "I am opposed neither to the concept of intraocular lenses nor to their use in selected cases," Henkind's letter suggests that he has at least a negative bias toward this procedure. Most of his criticisms about the lack of investigational background to implantation are quite valid. Perhaps to link, as he does, the bad results from use of "the initial lenses" (presumably those of Ridley and early pioneers in the field) with the results of the present generation of lenses is unfair. Certainly, if Henkind cannot identify more than a handful of patients who would require intraocular lens implantations among his http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Ophthalmology American Medical Association

Implantation vs Exploitation

Archives of Ophthalmology , Volume 95 (12) – Dec 1, 1977

Implantation vs Exploitation

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 have read with interest Dr Paul Henkind's letter in the June 1977 Archives, entitled: "Tilting at Windmills" (95:1083-1084). In this letter, Dr Henkind surveys the ethical and surgical problems that are associated with lens implantation and, to a lesser extent, with phacoemulsification. Although he asserts: "I...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/implantation-vs-exploitation-FvT4i1NCfJ
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0003-9950
eISSN
1538-3687
DOI
10.1001/archopht.1977.04450120137026
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 have read with interest Dr Paul Henkind's letter in the June 1977 Archives, entitled: "Tilting at Windmills" (95:1083-1084). In this letter, Dr Henkind surveys the ethical and surgical problems that are associated with lens implantation and, to a lesser extent, with phacoemulsification. Although he asserts: "I am opposed neither to the concept of intraocular lenses nor to their use in selected cases," Henkind's letter suggests that he has at least a negative bias toward this procedure. Most of his criticisms about the lack of investigational background to implantation are quite valid. Perhaps to link, as he does, the bad results from use of "the initial lenses" (presumably those of Ridley and early pioneers in the field) with the results of the present generation of lenses is unfair. Certainly, if Henkind cannot identify more than a handful of patients who would require intraocular lens implantations among his

Journal

Archives of OphthalmologyAmerican Medical Association

Published: Dec 1, 1977

There are no references for this article.