Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / September 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

PureVision Toric lenses

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
DK - 08 Sep 2006 17:07 GMT
My Rx is in the -7 range, with astigmatism in the -1 range. My previous
toric contacts over the past couple years were Frequency 55 (for one eye)
and Soflens 66 (for the other), but both lenses rotated out of place
frequently and I wasn't real pleased with them.

My new optometrist just tried a couple different Biomedic toric lenses on
me, but those seem to rotate a lot too.

Now he's ordered me PureVision Toric lenses to try, which he says are
stiffer and hopefully less likely to rotate out of place. I haven't gotten
them yet, but was wondering what opinions you eye docs have of these lenses,
since they are pretty new. Are they less likely to rotate than Biomedics and
similar lenses and do they tend to work well for hard-to-fit patients?

Also, how does a lens' water content affect tear levels in theeye? Do the
ones with higher water content tend to absorb the tears more like a sponge,
and make the eye feel dryer? Or does it work the opposite, where all the
water in the lens keeps the eye moist?

It looks like PureVision lenses have less water content than the previous
ones, but from what I understand, in silicone hydrogels, the silicone is
what transfers the oxygen rather than the water in regular hydrogels, is
that right?

Any and all opinions on PureVision toric lenses would be appreciated!

Signature

DK

LarryDoc - 08 Sep 2006 19:22 GMT
> My Rx is in the -7 range, with astigmatism in the -1 range. My previous
> toric contacts over the past couple years were Frequency 55 (for one eye)
> and Soflens 66 (for the other), but both lenses rotated out of place
> frequently and I wasn't real pleased with them.

The Purevision Toric is the same design as the SL66 toric and most of
time perform the same.

> My new optometrist just tried a couple different Biomedic toric lenses on
> me, but those seem to rotate a lot too.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> since they are pretty new. Are they less likely to rotate than Biomedics and
> similar lenses and do they tend to work well for hard-to-fit patients?

As I wrote above, but, as your doctor said, the different modulus of the
material *may* help keep it more stable.  If your cyl is -1, you should
be using the -.75 lens, not the 1.25.

> Also, how does a lens' water content affect tear levels in theeye? Do the
> ones with higher water content tend to absorb the tears more like a sponge,
> and make the eye feel dryer? Or does it work the opposite, where all the
> water in the lens keeps the eye moist?

The dehydration effect has to do with both the water content of the lens
AND the plastic's ability to hold the water in the lens matrix. There
are 55% water lenses that dry up like an old sponge and others that stay
reasonably and efectively pliant and moist with moderately dry eyes and
low humidity.

> It looks like PureVision lenses have less water content than the previous
> ones, but from what I understand, in silicone hydrogels, the silicone is
> what transfers the oxygen rather than the water in regular hydrogels, is
> that right?

Yes, and therefore the material is oxygen transmission stable, compared
to older plastics that vary depending upon hydration.

> Any and all opinions on PureVision toric lenses would be appreciated!

I find it to be an excellent lens.  I also use a number of others as
appropriate to achieve the best fit and vision and as is available for
that person's prescription.

Your other post/query: cleaning.  Most any non-abrasive soft lens
cleaner to rub and rinse off will be great.  You can also use the
so-called n0-rub multipurpose products (the ones ok for silicone lenses)
and rub that product on the lens to get pretty good cleaning action
prior to soaking for disinfection.

LB, O.D.
ArsenalFire - 09 Sep 2006 04:09 GMT
I do not find the positional stability to be the same as the Soflens
66.  For one, the PureVision Toric has a flatter central curve and a
smaller diameter.  Although this may approximate the SL66 fit /
sagittal depth, its performance does not appear to be as similar as we
were led to believe by B & L.  I fit many more PureVision torics than
the SL66.

Dr. ABS
Ace - 10 Sep 2006 02:56 GMT
You may want to look into RGP contacts or even orthokeratology which
are superior over soft contacts. Forget lasik, it damages every eye. I
have friends who wear torics and none are happy, they rotate and also
dont properly correct their astigmatism. They find glasses, RGPs or
orthoK better.
LarryDoc - 10 Sep 2006 03:00 GMT
> You may want to look into RGP contacts or even orthokeratology which
> are superior over soft contacts. Forget lasik, it damages every eye. I
> have friends who wear torics and none are happy, they rotate and also
> dont properly correct their astigmatism. They find glasses, RGPs or
> orthoK better.

You may want to look into Ace's mind and find an empty shell of
worthless thought.

I have friends who wear torics and all are happy. Many of them have
perfectly corrected astigmatism. None of them give a damn about anything
the moron Ace has to say.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.