 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / October 2006Who makes -14 contacts?
Just came from a visit to my opthamologist. My vision in the left eye is -14.75 and -2.5 (I think she said I had a slight astigmatism). We are looking at a minus 13 or 14 disposable or extended wear contact lens. She thinks they have to be specially ordered as most companies only make them off-the-rack to minus 12, and I am no longer getting the best vision from the minus 12. Which companies make minus 14 lenses which are extended wear or disposable? We would like to get a trial of a 13 and 14 and see which is best. I need disposable or extended wear. I can currently tolerate the AcuVue Advanced, so I need something as light and easy to wear. You might try Precision UV, which go up to -14 off the shelf last time I checked, but they don't correct astigmatism. There may be others. If you want full astigmatic correction, it is for sure a custom lens. I'm assuming the -14.00 is a CONTACT LENS power, not a SPECTACLE LENS power. There is a huge difference at these levels. w.stacy, o.d. > Just came from a visit to my opthamologist. My vision in the left eye > is -14.75 and -2.5 (I think she said I had a slight astigmatism). We are [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > disposable or extended wear. I can currently tolerate the AcuVue Advanced, > so I need something as light and easy to wear. >Just came from a visit to my opthamologist. My vision in the left eye >is -14.75 and -2.5 (I think she said I had a slight astigmatism). We are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Which companies make minus 14 lenses which are extended wear or disposable? Lots. CooperVision for one with their Hydrasoft FW spherical lenses. They can be ordered in the "Options" modality which gets you a quarterly replacement schedule. And as Dr. Stacy wrote, disposable Precision UV go up to -14D. I've had a few patients in these lenses and I always try to convert these people into RGPs, wear a -12D silicone hydrogel contact lens (SHCL) (e.g., Oasys) with spectacles over that, or get them to consider refractive surgery. -14D HEMA lenses almost without fail cause excessive signs of oxygen deprivation if worn on a EW basis, and many times even when worn on a DW basis. Unfortunately (AFAIK) NO silicone hydrogel contact lenses are made higher than a -12D. >We would like to get a trial of a 13 and 14 and see which is best. I need >disposable or extended wear. Why do you need EW or dispsoable? >I can currently tolerate the AcuVue Advanced, so I need something as >light and easy to wear. You are not gonna find a -14D HEMA soft contact lens that is as nice, light and easy to wear as a SHCL. Get SH50 from Gelflex (www.gelflex.com) They are a custom made silicone hydrogel that can be made as a toric to correct the 2.50 cyl (which is a lot, by the way) dr grant >>> I've had a few patients in these lenses and I always try to convert > these people into RGPs, wear a -12D silicone hydrogel contact lens > (SHCL) (e.g., Oasys) with spectacles over that, or get them to > consider refractive surgery. What kind of refractive surgery would you suggest for a 56 years old with -14? >>>>I've had a few patients in these lenses and I always try to convert >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > What kind of refractive surgery would you suggest for a 56 years old > with -14? Right now the best solution is probably the Visian intraocular lens. Pretty new, and you need to find a surgeon who's done a few of them (at least 10). Results are very good. w.stacy, o.d. From everything I've heard, from doctors, and read on the Internet as well as the Visian web site, you do not give an interocular lens to someone 56 years old. >>>>>I've had a few patients in these lenses and I always try to convert >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > w.stacy, o.d. > From everything I've heard, from doctors, and read on the Internet as well > as the Visian web site, you do not give an interocular lens to someone 56 > years old. The results of CLE are pretty lousy if you don't get an intraocular implant. "Clear lens extraction" is cataract surgery done for refractive correction. Ten years ago it was unheard-of, and many old-school surgeons still won't do it, but CLE is becoming more popular. And 56 is a perfectly acceptable age for it. -MT > The results of CLE are pretty lousy if you don't get an intraocular implant. > "Clear lens extraction" is cataract surgery done for refractive correction. > Ten years ago it was unheard-of, and many old-school surgeons still won't do > it, but CLE is becoming more popular. And 56 is a perfectly acceptable age > for it. What about the risks of retinal detachment for someone with high myopia?  SignatureCharles Pretty high, while almost zero for the Visian posterior chamber lens. Sure, someday you might need cataract surgery, but if I were -14, I wouldn't go for a clear lens exchange. The risk is too high for my comfort zone. If you do get cataracts, you can have both the Visian removed and the IOL put in at the same time, through the same incision (small). I don't know why they are not recommending it for presbyopes, unless they are pushing their own multifocal IOL which they probably are, which makes me sick. w.stacy, o.d. > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > So, it appears that I was thing of the Visian as the posterior lens. The discussions I've had are that I will certainly have cataracts if I live long enough, and that's the primary reason, not the only one. Obviously, if it were a 50/50 proposition I would certainly opt for adding a lens than for remove my clear one. However, i'm told it is simply a poor move for a 56 year old who is already at a plus 2.00 for reading. Incidentally, the doctor makes the same money from either procedure, so it does not appear to be an example of a doctor pushing something for monetary reasons. Pretty high, while almost zero for the Visian posterior chamber lens. Sure, someday you might need cataract surgery, but if I were -14, I wouldn't go for a clear lens exchange. The risk is too high for my comfort zone. If you do get cataracts, you can have both the Visian removed and the IOL put in at the same time, through the same incision (small). I don't know why they are not recommending it for presbyopes, unless they are pushing their own multifocal IOL which they probably are, which makes me sick. w.stacy, o.d. Charles wrote: In article <nZmdnZAiyc2iSbPYnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Mike Tyner <mtyner@mindspring.com> wrote: The results of CLE are pretty lousy if you don't get an intraocular implant. "Clear lens extraction" is cataract surgery done for refractive correction. Ten years ago it was unheard-of, and many old-school surgeons still won't do it, but CLE is becoming more popular. And 56 is a perfectly acceptable age for it. What about the risks of retinal detachment for someone with high myopia? > However, i'm told it is simply a poor move for a 56 > year old who is already at a plus 2.00 for reading. I'm 56. Exactly (until December anyway, when I turn 57). I have IOLs in both eyes. I had cataract, which is why the surgery was done. If I hadn't had cataract, I would have stuck with what I was using, which was contacts for distance (-10 and -12), and OTC readers over them for close. I don't understand your paragraph above. This procedure is a poor choice for someone who has *no* plus. If you have lost your accommodation already, I'm not sure what you have to lose. Note that I am a layperson and don't understand a lot of things. SignatureDan Abel dabel@sonic.net Petaluma, California, USA The IOL is the suggested procedure. I was talking about the lens which does not replace the natural lens, but is added (usually under the iris). That lens I understood was for those who still had most of their accommodation. I may very well have a clear lens extraction on the one bad eye (minus 13 or 14). I'm just a bit weary as it is such a permenent and irreversible procdure. Right now I'm trying different contacts to see if we can find one which restores my vision and which I can tolerate wearing for long periods. >> However, i'm told it is simply a poor move for a 56 >> year old who is already at a plus 2.00 for reading. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Note that I am a layperson and don't understand a lot of things. You already lost accomodation, so why is it a poor move? Anyway, it's your decision and good luck. So, it appears that I was thing of the Visian as the posterior lens. The discussions I've had are that I will certainly have cataracts if I live long enough, and that's the primary reason, not the only one. Obviously, if it were a 50/50 proposition I would certainly opt for adding a lens than for remove my clear one. However, i'm told it is simply a poor move for a 56 year old who is already at a plus 2.00 for reading. Incidentally, the doctor makes the same money from either procedure, so it does not appear to be an example of a doctor pushing something for monetary reasons I just had retina exam from my doctor, and if I decided on the CLE it would be a more vigorous exam by a specialist. My doctor told me there is no higher risk of RD from the surgery for a high Myopre, than there is generally for a high myope. She said high myopes have a higher instance of RD than the general public, but statistically, it doesn't go up with the surgery. >> The results of CLE are pretty lousy if you don't get an intraocular >> implant. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > What about the risks of retinal detachment for someone with high myopia? I must disagree with that. It is well known that phaco with iol implant is a significant risk to myopes. Of course myopes are at risk for retinal detachment generally, but that risk is DEFINITELY increased during surgery and for quite some time after surgery. Unlike the posterior chamber lens, which carries little or no ADDITIONAL risk for detachment. My own mother had a retinal detachment and giant retinal tear DURING iol surgery. The reason for this additional risk has to do with surgeon skill and retinal stretching from myopia, and the fact that the ciliary body gets manipulated during the procedure. w.stacy, o.d. >I just had retina exam from my doctor, and if I decided on the CLE it would >be a more vigorous exam by a specialist. My doctor told me there is no [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > >I just had retina exam from my doctor, and if I decided on the CLE it would >be a more vigorous exam by a specialist. My doctor told me there is no >higher risk of RD from the surgery for a high Myopre, than there is >generally for a high myope. She said high myopes have a higher instance of >RD than the general public, but statistically, it doesn't go up with the >surgery. I don't know who your doc is, but AFAIK most cataract surgeons and retina specialists wouldn't agree with her. I stand corrected. I was thinking of the Verisys, which is an implant. Of course CLE is something I'm considering. I have heard that the Visian is not a great choice, as it loses its accomodating feature in a year or two. >> From everything I've heard, from doctors, and read on the Internet as >> well as the Visian web site, you do not give an interocular lens to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -MT oh and make sure you get one who's comfy doing limbal relaxing incisions, so you get the max vision you can. w.stacy, o.d. >>>>I've had a few patients in these lenses and I always try to convert >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > What kind of refractive surgery would you suggest for a 56 years old > with -14? > Just came from a visit to my opthamologist. My vision in the left eye > is -14.75 and -2.5 (I think she said I had a slight astigmatism). We are [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > disposable or extended wear. I can currently tolerate the AcuVue Advanced, > so I need something as light and easy to wear. You could stick with your -12 and get thin glasses with -2.75 and the astigmatism correction to wear over. Dr Judy |
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.