Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Reply: Upper Eyelid Postseptal Weight Placement for Treatment of Paralytic Lagophthalmos

Rozen, Shai M.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: January 2014 - Volume 133 - Issue 1 - p 70e–71e
doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000438064.31043.b7
Letters
Free

Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 1801 Inwood Road, Dallas, Texas 75390-9132, shai.rozen@utsouthwestern.edu

Back to Top | Article Outline

Sir:

I would like to thank Drs. Davies, Hink, and Durairaj for their gracious comment. I read with great interest the article by Tower and Dailey.1 Indeed, this is technically a similar technique and we are certainly happy to acknowledge this article, which we did not previously encounter. After reading this article, I would like to point out a few subtle differences. The first is the choice of weight. Having a facial palsy practice teaches you that in cases of incomplete palsy, there is often a time-dependent dynamic in terms of ability to close the eye—often improving although not normalizing. Therefore, we perform surgery with the patient under intravenous sedation, enabling us to insert the smallest possible weight that will provide protection when changing from previously placed weights. Second, the article details some additional considerations in secondary surgery, including position change from the pretarsal position to the postseptal position, including concomitant repair of entropion commonly encountered. Third, as the authors noted, we also emphasized using the postseptal fat as an additional layer of coverage when available and orbicularis muscle closure, and I am sure this was performed by Dr. Tower and Dailey in their original operation but not mentioned. Fourth, we suggested a general rule of increasing the measured weight in the office by 0.2 g because of its more posterior position, based on our experience, again enabling use of the smallest effective weight for closure yet minimizing the chance for ptosis. With this said, once more, I would like to thank Drs. Davies, Hink, and Durairaj for their comment, and humbly admit that no progress in surgery can be achieved without the experiences of our predecessors.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCLOSURE

The author has no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this communication.

Shai Rozen, M.D.

Department of Plastic Surgery

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

1801 Inwood Road

Dallas, Texas 75390-9132

shai.rozen@utsouthwestern.edu

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCE

1. Tower RN, Dailey RA. Gold weight implantation: A better way? Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;20:202–206
Back to Top | Article Outline

GUIDELINES

Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article’s publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.

Letters submitted should pose a specific question that clarifies a point that either was not made in the article or was unclear, and therefore a response from the corresponding author of the article is requested.

Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS’ enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.

We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.

The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.

The Journal requests that individuals submit no more than five (5) letters to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in a calendar year.

©2014American Society of Plastic Surgeons