Eye laser treatment - pro's and con's.
Discussion
I went for an initial consultation and was advised that my night vision may well be worse than it is currently even if they used wavefront technology which would have cost £3k plus. Needless to say I didnt have it done and have switched to silicone based contact lenses which are very comfortable and for the same cost will provide me with over 10 yr supply.
That said if they hadnt have said about the night vision I would have had the surgery done,evidently night vision problems are one of the most common side effects.
That said if they hadnt have said about the night vision I would have had the surgery done,evidently night vision problems are one of the most common side effects.
You may want to ask one of the circulating opthalmologists on the board, but I'm not sure glasses will help you with night vision. As I believe its due to refracted light on the little scars the laser makes on the front of your eye.
One of the many reasons I don't seem to see many opthalmologists having this proceedure done to themselves
One of the many reasons I don't seem to see many opthalmologists having this proceedure done to themselves
baron bashoneov said:
I had eye laser treatment (lasik) three years ago and I have had no problems.
I was -4 in both eyes before.
Recently visited the opticians and may now need glasses if I am doing a lot
of night driving.
Has any Phers had any bad experiences
There are lots of factors which could be contributing to this. Firstly, how old are you? Secondly, have you noticed a problem yourself, or is the optician just telling you there is a problem? What sort of problems are you noticing? Where did you have your LASIK done?
The main problem with night driving tends to be caused by scarring of the cornea, which causes haloes around lights, however glasses won't actually help, particularly with this problem.
In fact an increasing number of Ophthalmologists are getting LASIK done now, such as Mr Gartry (one of the foremost proponents of LASIK) as it is becoming more reliable and predictable, however the long term consequences are still uncertain, since it has been done for 10 years. Nonetheless, in high prescriptions such as yours, LASIK will be of tremendous benefit, compared to a lifetime of contact lenses, which may permanently scar your cornea, in a much more visually significant way.
One reason that a lot of Consultants Ophthalmologists don't have the op, is because a lot of them are presbyopic, therefore LASIK will have limited benefit for them. I personally feel that in equivocal prescriptions, ie -2.00 and -1.00D, it isn't really worth it, but in higher prescriptions, -3, -4 and upwards, it provides huge benefits.
BliarOut said:
If you have it done when you're young, you may end up wearing glasses again in middle age. My short sightedness is now being countered by long sightedness and I've only just turned forty. I'm sure 968 will explain it far more eloquently than I.
That's presbyopia.... ie, your eye cannot accomodate well, to an object close to you, hence you read at an arms length..... it affects us all, after our 40s (apart from very shortsighted people) but happily, as we get older, and develop cataracts, they make you more shortsighted, so the longsightedness can improve, but will be replaced by mistiness... however, nice people like me will take out your cataract, and give you perfect vision again, so it's all swings and roundabouts....
siwil1 said:
I went for an initial consultation and was advised that my night vision may well be worse than it is currently even if they used wavefront technology which would have cost £3k plus. Needless to say I didnt have it done and have switched to silicone based contact lenses which are very comfortable and for the same cost will provide me with over 10 yr supply.
That said if they hadnt have said about the night vision I would have had the surgery done,evidently night vision problems are one of the most common side effects.
Blimey, that's steep!
The extent of night vision effects are being limited to some degree, now, by the newer femptosecond lasers, which result in less corneal scarring and less problems with contrast sensitivity post-op.
Perhaps you should get another consultation at Accuvision, where they charge 700 an eye, and have a world class Corneal surgeon performing the ops.
A now-no-longer-in-business place damaged one of my brother's eyes whilst carrying out the procedure. He has now spent over double what he originally paid to correct both to repair the one eye (his private insurance cover only paid a small part of the repair surgery as they don't normally cover "cosmetic" procedures like corrective eye surgery).
His other eye now has perfect vision.
Methinks I'll stick to my -2.50 vision and daily disposable contacts.
>> Edited by Jinx on Wednesday 2nd November 16:09
His other eye now has perfect vision.
Methinks I'll stick to my -2.50 vision and daily disposable contacts.
>> Edited by Jinx on Wednesday 2nd November 16:09
Jinx said:
A now-no-longer-in-business place damaged one of my brother's eyes whilst carrying out the procedure. He has now spent over double what he originally paid to correct both to repair the one eye (his private insurance cover only paid a small part of the repair surgery as they don't normally cover "cosmetic" procedures like corrective eye surgery).
His other eye now has perfect vision.
Methinks I'll stick to my -2.50 vision and daily disposable contacts.
>> Edited by Jinx on Wednesday 2nd November 16:09
perhaps that's why they went out of business?
complications can happen, but it's how they are dealt with that really defines how good a place is, and how good a surgeon is. Having worked for Chad Rostron, who does LASIK, he had one complication due to LASIK, which he sorted out the same day at the NHS hospital, on his operating list, at no charge.
968 said:
I went for an initial consultation and was advised that my night vision may well be worse than it is currently even if they used wavefront technology which would have cost £3k plus. Needless to say I didnt have it done and have switched to silicone based contact lenses which are very comfortable and for the same cost will provide me with over 10 yr supply.
That said if they hadnt have said about the night vision I would have had the surgery done,evidently night vision problems are one of the most common side effects.
Blimey, that's steep!
The extent of night vision effects are being limited to some degree, now, by the newer femptosecond lasers, which result in less corneal scarring and less problems with contrast sensitivity post-op.
Perhaps you should get another consultation at Accuvision, where they charge 700 an eye, and have a world class Corneal surgeon performing the ops.
This was about 18months ago when I believe wavefront(correct me if i'm wrong)was the latest thing. Where are Accuvision based? as although I'm happy with lenses I would still like freedom!
my prescription is -2.75 in both eyes and i'm 36 am i a good candidate?
When I had my consultation they advised me that my eyes naturally defract light and I do see halo's around lights which is I assume what thay mean.
Simon
>> Edited by siwil1 on Wednesday 2nd November 16:25
968 said:
In fact an increasing number of Ophthalmologists are getting LASIK done now, such as Mr Gartry (one of the foremost proponents of LASIK) as it is becoming more reliable and predictable,
Blimey (pun?), that's noble of him! So how many guinea pigs has he had to test, & maybe modify, the proceedure on before he feels confident enough to risk his own eyesight? I'd love to not need specs (as they severely curtail what I can do), but things like that statement really put me off getting laser surgery done. I've only got one pair of eyes & if I mess them up that's it, it's a heck of a risk to take.
I know 2 people that have had corrective laser treatment. One has had her life transformed (she was very myopic) but another, being self-employed running his own company & needing to get the cash to pay for the op, went back to work asap. He figured that he wouldn't do anything strenuous, so just did some van driving. It messed up the vision in one eye. Permanently. If you get the surgery done then rest for as long as you're told to (or longer
). Even driving a van for a couple of days can mess your eyesight up for life, so just take it real easy.siwil1 said:
This was about 18months ago when I believe wavefront(correct me if i'm wrong)was the latest thing. Where are Accuvision based? as although I'm happy with lenses I would still like freedom!
my prescription is -2.75 in both eyes and i'm 36 am i a good candidate?
When I had my consultation they advised me that my eyes naturally defract light and I do see halo's around lights which is I assume what thay meen.
Simon
Accuvision is based in Fulham, but they have another branch I think in Solihull. www.accuvision.co.uk
Wavefront has been around for a little while, and people have got better at using it, although there's a good deal of debate as to whether it makes any difference. A big factor, however, is how the flap is made and what laser is used to ablate your cornea.
With regard to what you were told at your consultation, I don't know what they are talking about. I think they need to be a bit more specific. You shouldn't get such effects with lights, unless you have some abnormality of your cornea, or anterior segment of your eye.....
>> Edited by 968 on Wednesday 2nd November 16:27
L81 said:
Blimey (pun?), that's noble of him! So how many guinea pigs has he had to test, & maybe modify, the proceedure on before he feels confident enough to risk his own eyesight? I'd love to not need specs (as they severely curtail what I can do), but things like that statement really put me off getting laser surgery done. I've only got one pair of eyes & if I mess them up that's it, it's a heck of a risk to take.
I don't know how long into his LASIK practice he had it done to himself, but he had it done over 4 years ago, not because of any nobility, but because he was convinced that it was a safe and predictable procedure, that even he, as rather neurotic chap, would tolerate.
968 said:
I don't know how long into his LASIK practice he had it done to himself, but he had it done over 4 years ago, not because of any nobility, but because he was convinced that it was a safe and predictable procedure, that even he, as rather neurotic chap, would tolerate.
Which is my point. If he's a foremost proponant of the treatment then that must mean that he wasn't fully convinced by the safety/effectiveness of the treatment until sometime between 4 & 5 years ago. So up until then he must have been telling prospective patients that it was low risk, even though he wasn't that sure of it himself? It doesn't do much to convince me to put my trust in the professionals advocating the treatment
A simile would be a chef who prepared exotic dishes from a particularly poisonous fish/mollusc/cretin who didn't eat it himself until a lot of people had safely eaten it for a few years! Call me a disgraced cabinet minister, but I'd want to see the chef eat it before I took a bite
L81 said:
Which is my point. If he's a foremost proponant of the treatment then that must mean that he wasn't fully convinced by the safety/effectiveness of the treatment until sometime between 4 & 5 years ago. So up until then he must have been telling prospective patients that it was low risk, even though he wasn't that sure of it himself? It doesn't do much to convince me to put my trust in the professionals advocating the treatment
LASIK has been around, in total for 10 years, in the last 5 years it has become much more widespread, in this country, where cosmetic private procedures have had a limited market. He may well have been doing LASIK, commercially for little over 5 years.
As a surgeon myself, if I wasn't sure of a procedures benefits, I wouldn't offer it to patients. Simple as that. If I didn't think it could offer the patient significant benefits with low risk, I wouldnt offer it. I may never have the procedure myself, and may never need it, but I would still only offer a procedure based on the best available evidence. It's the way most medics work, in this country. I am sure (knowing Mr Gartry) that he was convinced of its safety and efficacy, as he is a highly respected chap, and a very nice chap too, with a good reputation. If he was the sort of chap who would conduct such shady practice, he wouldn't have such a good reputation.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff