Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > December 2005 > Another misleading statement out of context about corneal nerve regeneration.





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Another misleading statement out of context about corneal nerve regeneration.
Glenn - USAEyes.org

2005-12-27, 1:04 am

On 26 Dec 2005 17:35:00 -0800, Trulytelling@yahoo.com wrote:

>Glenn, these patients are using drops because they have nerve damage
>from an elective procedure. Likely they were not told that persistent,
>perhaps permanent nerve damage was part and parcel of corneal
>refractive surgical procedures.


Patients are likely not told that "persistent, perhaps permanent nerve
damage was part and parcel of corneal refractive surgical procedures",
because it is not a wholly truthful statement. You are doing what I
call "lying the truth". In the abstract what you say is accurate, but
in consideration of the whole it is a misrepresentation.

Tissue is removed to reshape the cornea. Every patient is told this.
Some of that tissue is nerve tissue,and such nerves regenerate to
preoperative levels in 3 years (PRK) to 5 years (LASIK) and
sensitivity function returns within the normal six month healing
period for at least 97% of refractive surgery patients.

>How can you say that symptoms of dry eye are less than 3% at 6 months
>when the peer-reviewd article posted above states "Symptom severity
>scores were significantly
>increased at 1 week, 12 months, and 16 months postoperatively (P <
>0.007 at all time points)."


Perhaps because I talk to the authors of studies if someone quotes out
of context or misinterprets a finding. The study relates to the
OCCURRANCE of dry eye symptoms, not UNRESOLVED symptoms. More than 40%
having the OCCURRANCE of dry eyes postoperatively is not at all
surprising, however they heal and the symptoms are RESOLVED.

>The Mayo Clinic longitudinal study did not include PRK patients, and
>nothing has been published since the 3 year study showing nerves were
>decreased over 40% at the 3 year mark. You keep talking about data
>you're not showing Glenn. Provide a reference if you expect to be
>believed.


The Mayo study to which I refer compared PRK and LASIK patients. And
for the umpteenth time, here is a link back to one of the other
umpteenth times I've cited the study.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?B23551F5C and
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P21531F5C

Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
USAEyes.org

"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 2003 - 2008 pahealthsystems.com