I'm not sure I understand 😅 What would be the "two implementations"? PTLCs vs Trampoline?

I believe that your paragraph on PTLCs refers to this proposition by Matt Corallo (and other more recent discussions on the matter). In this context, there is still a third party who delays forwarding: the sender's LSP. PTLCs are useful here because they enable the receiver to just give a bunch of invoices to their LSP beforehand, knowing that said LSP won't be able to reuse them and still funds (which could happen with HTLCs).

Moreover, the above scenario could be tweaked to include Trampoline nodes along the route, and the LSPs involved could even be Trampoline nodes themselves.

In this regard I think that stating that "PTLC’s offers less risk than trampoline relays do since trampoline relays will require a third party to delay forwarding the funds until the offline node can restore its connection" is not true, since in the PTLCs scenario there is still a third party delaying the payment - and I can't really think of a way to get around that. But I might be missing something here, so happy to be corrected and learn!

Cheers!