[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.211.41.181. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
February 1984

Ocular Surface Disease

Author Affiliations

Washington, DC

Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102(2):194. doi:10.1001/archopht.1984.01040030148008

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.  —Kinoshita et al1 should be congratulated for further elucidating some aspects of ocular surface disease. Their use of a more sensitive indicator for mucinlike glycoproteins is a distinct step forward. The fact that this type of material is seen in the tears of patients with significantly decreased conjunctival goblet cells is interesting. The authors, however, correctly point out that these measurements do not necessarily reflect changes in adsorbed mucin on the ocular surface. I would point to the typographic error on page 1,286 in which the word "absorbed" is used in place of the correct "adsorbed."The hypothesis the authors advance that conjunctival goblet cell densities are an indicator of altered surface morphology is certainly consistent with their findings. The speculation that there might be premature corneal epithelial cell death, or accelerated exfoliation in a number of diseases is consistent with the data that we have

References
1.
Kinoshita S, Kiorpes TC, Friend J, et al:  Goblet cell density in ocular surface disease: A better indicator than tear mucin . Arch Ophthalmol 1983;101:1284-1287.Article
2.
Lemp MA, Guimaeres R, Mahmood MA, et al:  In vivo surface morphology of human cornea in normal and dry eyes , abstracted. AVRO Invest Ophthalmol 1983;24:76.
×