This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Pediatric Ophthalmology  • Retinal/ Chorioretinal Disorders  • Alert me on articles by topic

John T. Flynn, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(9):1275-1276.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The true impact of the Cryotherapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) randomized trial,¹ or CRYO-ROP trial as it came to be known, cannot be measured apart from the development of the international classification of ROP² (ICROP), which served as the backbone of the trial's organization. The trial served as a necessary and sufficient test of the validity of the classification itself. Both were validated by the exercise.

A brief overview of the background of the ICROP is in order to understand how closely entwined the two were and how both were born in response to the upsurge of ROP following a more liberal policy of oxygen use in the decade of the 1960s³ and the sporadic reports of the beneficial effects of photocoagulation⁴ and cryotherapy⁵ (coming from Japan and Israel primarily). The need for a new classification became obvious because studies had shown in previous decades . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Author Affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology, Harkness Eye Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York.