 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / September 20068 weeks post lasik for hyperopia question
It's now 8 weeks since I had lasik for hyperopia. I realised that I would need reading glasses but was unsure about middle distance vision. I have regressed since the op and am at 2 diopters for reading and 1 diopter for middle distance. Long distance is pretty perfect. I have an appointment in approx 4 weeks and was wondering if I could ask for an enhancement and what I should ask for. Ideally I would like middle distance without glasses, even if it was at the expense of loosing a little long distance. I am also considering buying some glasses (bifocal or varifocals) to cover the middle and short distance problems, at 8 weeks is my prescription likely to change or will it have settled? Thanks in advance. Unfortunately hyperopic LASIK commonly regresses, and may continue, which means you might need stronger glasses in another month or two. If you have an enhancement, have them shoot for about 1.50 overcorrection, and hope for no more than another .5 of regression after that one. w.stacy, o.d. >It's now 8 weeks since I had lasik for hyperopia. >I realised that I would need reading glasses but was unsure about [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > > Unfortunately hyperopic LASIK commonly regresses, and may continue, > which means you might need stronger glasses in another month or two. If > you have an enhancement, have them shoot for about 1.50 overcorrection, > and hope for no more than another .5 of regression after that one. > > w.stacy, o.d. Dear Bill, Please don't play into the LASIK marketing strategy using the terminology of "enhancement". It's a make-nice, sugar coated term for *retreatment* or *repeat surgery* and as you know, has similar risks as the first surgery. LB, O.D. Play into? That's what they've been called since the first one. I have a problem calling it a retreatment since it is another surgery, not just a treatment, and repeat surgery would suggest recutting the flap, which it almost NEVER entails. The patient knows what is meant by lifting the flap and relasering. I see it as having much less risk, since no cutting, no pressure/suction ring trauma, although the flollowup care/cautions are obviously the same as the original procedure. BTW I wouldn't recommend hyperopic lasik to anyone, esp. a presbyope, but since she already had it done, not much ADDITIONAL risk in having a, what shall I call it, a flap lift? w.stacy, o.d. > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >LB, O.D. > I use "enhancement surgery" to remind folks that is surgery. The idea of Lasik overcorrection from hyperopia (farsighted, longsighted) into myopia (nearsighted, shortsighted) vision is theoretically appropriate for select patients, but there is nothing that screws up a perfectly good theory faster than reality. Try the reality in contacts first. If you think that 1.50 diopters myopic would be a good final result, get fitted with contacts that provide -1.50 vision. Wear them religiously for at least a month and see how you actually like the world of myopia. You may find that you want to be more myopic, less myopic, or not myopic at all. You can try different refractive error until you determine what is best for your individual needs. Then, and really only then, should you consider having that correction attempted with Lasik or Lasik enhancement surgery. Two months after Lasik is commonly enough time to know where your vision will settle, but not with hyperopic correction. Hyperopic correction often regresses. It is probably best that you do not consider having enhancement surgery until at least six months postop, and possibly even longer. Glenn Hagele Executive Director USAEyes.org Patient Advocacy Surgeon Certification "Consider and Choose With Confidence" Email to glenn dot hagele at usaeyes dot org http://www.USAEyes.org http://www.ComplicatedEyes.org I am not a doctor. Copyright 2006 All Rights Reserved Glenn wrote: > I use "enhancement surgery" to remind folks that is surgery. Good! As long as "surgery" is included, I don't have the slightest problem. Just honesty. I know you agree! What I DO have an issue with is the practices that call it simply "enhancement", which conveys the impression that all is well and all you need is a little extra something to make it better. And THAT is disingenuous. Bill wrote: >Play into? That's what they've been called since the first one. That doesn't make it right. Just like "through away your glasses and contacts!" and "now with all-laser LASIK and CustomCornea you can have 20/20, even 20/15 vision!" Come on, you've heard the ads! Come on down! >I have a problem calling it a retreatment since it is another surgery, >not just a treatment, Ah, but you you just said it's another surgery. So call it what it is! > and repeat surgery would suggest recutting the >flap, which it almost NEVER entails. But hitting it with the laser and altering the cornea tissue is most certainly SURGERY. >The patient knows what is meant >by lifting the flap and relasering. Patient for the most part know only what we tell them, so why not tell them the truth? > I see it as having much less risk, >since no cutting, no pressure/suction ring trauma, although the >flollowup care/cautions are obviously the same as the original procedure. It might be less risky, but it is not without risk and the outcome of the additional surgery is far from certain. My ONLY contention is simply to be honest with our disclosures and presentation. So stop using disingenuous and misleading terminology. LB, O.D. > That doesn't make it right. Just like "through away your glasses and > contacts!" and "now with all-laser LASIK and CustomCornea you can have > 20/20, even 20/15 vision!" Come on, you've heard the ads! Come on down! Actually, as you probably know, many LASIK and wave front patients can indeed throw away their glasses and contacts. Millions have. What IS your problem? > Patient for the most part know only what we tell them, so why not tell > them the truth? Who's lying about what? I would never tell a patient to go back and have a "touch up" without informing them that it entails more surgery! > It might be less risky, but it is not without risk and the outcome of > the additional surgery is far from certain. I presume you have some documentation where the enhancements (flap lifts, re-surgery, whatever you want to call it) has less than positive benefits? I've never seen one go wrong yet. > My ONLY contention is simply to be honest with our disclosures and > presentation. So stop using disingenuous and misleading terminology. Those are strong words. I have made some people happy with retreatments. The terminology is secondary and, I think, a bit picaune. As someone once told me, Chill... > Dear Bill, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > LB, O.D. Here goes another one seeing monsters under his bed. No one is "playing into any lasik marketing strategy" here. Just giving advise, that's all, no secret agendas. |
Reply to this Message |
 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.