To the Editor.
—This letter is in regard to the article by Stenson in the March Archives (1983;101:402-404) entitled "Superior Limbic Keratoconjunctivitis Associated With Soft Contact Lens Wear." It is unfortunate that this fine contribution by an expert not only in contact lenses, but also in external diseases and conjunctival cytology, should use the term "superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis" (SLK) as part of the title and thus cause unnecessary confusion with the entity first described by me in 1963.1 Such incorrect terminology, I may add, has also been used in recent similar presentations by other authors (as yet unpublished).Clinically, the history, findings, and course of SLK (Theodore) are different from the contact lens keratoconjunctivitis (CLK) that Dr Stenson describes. First, SLK manifests a clear-cut, specific clinical picture; CLK is much more variable, presenting differing findings in different patients. Superior limbic keratoconjunctivitis is essentially bilateral; CLK is not necessarily bilateral.
Theodore FH. Superior Limbic Keratoconjunctivitis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1983;101(10):1627-1628. doi:10.1001/archopht.1983.01040020629032