Dear Editor,
The recent article by Dermarkarian et al.
1
contains an error in the anatomic description used in the title and in several areas of the case description. The authors are describing a case of an orbital tumour and not a “retro-orbital” tumour. The retro-orbital space begins immediately posterior to the orbit. A reader would expect to find a description of a tumour involving the cavernous sinus or adjacent intracranial space based on the anatomic term used. A correction to the title would at least assist future searchers of the medical literature in identifying whether this article is of interest. Eliminating the erroneous description throughout the article would also mitigate confusion for those who access the PDF version in the future.Footnotes and Disclosure
The author has no financial disclosures or conflicts of interest to declare.
Reference
- Retro-orbital alveolar soft-part sarcoma in a 76-year-old female: case report and review of the literature.Can J Ophthalmol. 2022; 57: e208-e210
Article info
Publication history
Published online: January 09, 2023
Accepted:
December 22,
2022
Received:
November 26,
2022
Identification
Copyright
© 2023 Canadian Ophthalmological Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
ScienceDirect
Access this article on ScienceDirectLinked Article
- Reply: Retro-orbital alveolar softpart sarcoma in a 76-year-old female: case report and review of the literatureCanadian Journal of OphthalmologyVol. 58Issue 2
- PreviewWe would like to thank Dr. Belliveau for his letter to the editor regarding our paper. When writing the paper, we intended for the term retro-orbital to describe the area directly behind the globe and involving the posterior orbit. Use of the term retrobulbar or posterior orbit may have been more appropriate for our paper.
- Full-Text
- Preview
