|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > March 2005 > IntraLase laser
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]
|
|
| WILLIAM MILES 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the IntraLase laser?
Supposed to be the latest technology.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 20:49:45 GMT, "WILLIAM MILES"
<wmiles1@verizon.net> wrote:
>Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the IntraLase laser?
>Supposed to be the latest technology.
>
It's the latest technology... used primarily as a marketing tool.
Some surgeons use it to make extremely thin flaps...flaps that tend to
wrinkle. The flaps made with the intralase are a problem to lift when
doing enhancements.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| The Intralase femtosecond laser is used to create the LASIK flap. It
is not used to reshape the cornea to change refractive error. It is
used instead of a mechanical microkeratome that creates the LASIK flap
with a metal blade.
For details, visit
http://www.usaeyes.org/faq/subjects..._intralasik.htm
| |
| gospa68@aol.com 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| There have been numerous reports of significant light sensitivity after
the Intralase procedure. It has been reported to continue well beyond
six months. I have no clue yet as to if and when it resolves. WK
| |
| rebeccaNO_SPAM@lasermyeye.org 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
|
gosp...@aol.com wrote:
> There have been numerous reports of significant light sensitivity
after
> the Intralase procedure. It has been reported to continue well beyond
> six months. I have no clue yet as to if and when it resolves. WK
We have a little inforamtion on that at
http://www.lasermyeye.org/encyclopedia/tls.html
EyeWorld published a good article last August (I think the link is on
the encyclopedia page).
I know doctors who don't seem to see much of a problem with it but
others are reporting it as a significant concern. You should speak with
your doctor about it.
If you have average or thinner than average corneas, and moderate to
high prescription, using Intralase may reduce your risk of ectasia by
creating a thinner flap. It also eliminates some of the complications
associated with using a blade to cut the flap. Personally I have
concerns about the combination of Intralase and Ladarvision after
reports I've heard from a few different high-volume users who have used
it with both Ladar and VISX that the combination of Intralase and Ladar
resulted in slipped flaps far more frequently than with VISX. That is
purely anecdotal, but you asked about Intralase so I'm sharing my
opinion.
Rebecca Petris
www.lasermyeye.org
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| If WizKid, or anyone, would like a clue about light sensitivity after
Intralase and its resolution on the rare ocassion it does occur, they
need only read the article referenced above.
| |
| serebel 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
|
WILLIAM MILES wrote:
> Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the IntraLase
laser?
> Supposed to be the latest technology.
You can pretty much discount what Rebecca and WizKid posts. Rebecca
runs a website that caters to the lunatic fringe, and posts as truth
that Alcon's lasers are defective. This is only conjecture, the hopes
and dreams of the fringe.
The light sensitivity of the intralase has so far always dissipated.
So, Wizzer doesn't have a clue.
It's good to have choices that we have now, so you can do what is in
your best interest.
SErebel
| |
| serebel 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
|
WILLIAM MILES wrote:
> Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the IntraLase
laser?
> Supposed to be the latest technology.
You can pretty much discount what Rebecca and WizKid posts. Rebecca
runs a website that caters to the lunatic fringe, and posts as truth
that Alcon's lasers are defective. This is only conjecture, the hopes
and dreams of the fringe.
The light sensitivity of the intralase has so far always dissipated.
So, Wizzer doesn't have a clue.
It's good to have choices that we have now, so you can do what is in
your best interest.
SErebel
| |
| serebel 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
|
WILLIAM MILES wrote:
> Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the IntraLase
laser?
> Supposed to be the latest technology.
You can pretty much discount what Rebecca and WizKid posts. Rebecca
runs a website that caters to the lunatic fringe, and posts as truth
that Alcon's lasers are defective. This is only conjecture, the hopes
and dreams of the fringe.
The light sensitivity of the intralase has so far always dissipated.
So, Wizzer doesn't have a clue.
It's good to have choices that we have now, so you can do what is in
your best interest.
SErebel
| |
| dontknowjack 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| Dr. Boothe has done more intralase than anyone in the world--verified by
the intralase corp. This is what he has to say about intralase. It is
his opinion that it is much safer than blades. First, it can cut a thin
flap (as thin as 90 microns). Second it cuts to within 10 microns of what
it says it will cut. Blades vary in the thickness much more than that. So
your chance of getting an ectasia, where you thin the cornea too much, is
highly improbable with intralase. In fact, out of the 24,000 cases that
he has done, he has never had an ectasia with intralase. Out of 24000
cases, the visual axis has never been encroached upon by the cut, unlike
blade keratomes. The sensitivity to light issue is uncommon if one tapers
the use of a steroid such as Lotemax over a period of one month. If a rare
patient has light sensitivity, it is treatable with further steroid
treatment. Dr. Boothe has never seen a persistant case of light
sensitivity that did not repond to this treatment. The flaps, being
thinner, do slip more that blade flaps. However, using a contact lens for
one day after surgery reduces this to about one percent. Wrinkles come out
of intralase flaps much easier than blade flaps. Ingrowth is less likely
to occur with intralase flaps. Striae are less likely with intralase
flaps. There is greater accuracy of the correction when using intralase
as compared to blade cut flaps. When the surgeon performs intralase, the
flap cut is visualized the whole time, unlike when a surgeon does a blade
cut. If the patient's eye rotates under the suction ring while a blade
cut is being done, the surgeon is unknowingly left with a mess. If the
eye rotates under the suction ring with intralase, it is visualized and
can be repositioned without consequence. Therefore, many uncertainties
are removed with the use of intralase. The advantages of intralase far
outweigh any disadvantages.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-03-19, 6:21 pm |
| On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 14:07:18 -0500, "dontknowjack"
<texeyecare@msn.com> wrote:
>Dr. Boothe has done more intralase than anyone in the world--verified by
>the intralase corp. This is what he has to say about intralase. It is
>his opinion that it is much safer than blades. First, it can cut a thin
>flap (as thin as 90 microns). Second it cuts to within 10 microns of what
>it says it will cut. Blades vary in the thickness much more than that. So
>your chance of getting an ectasia, where you thin the cornea too much, is
>highly improbable with intralase. In fact, out of the 24,000 cases that
>he has done, he has never had an ectasia with intralase. Out of 24000
>cases, the visual axis has never been encroached upon by the cut, unlike
>blade keratomes. The sensitivity to light issue is uncommon if one tapers
>the use of a steroid such as Lotemax over a period of one month. If a rare
>patient has light sensitivity, it is treatable with further steroid
>treatment. Dr. Boothe has never seen a persistant case of light
>sensitivity that did not repond to this treatment. The flaps, being
>thinner, do slip more that blade flaps. However, using a contact lens for
>one day after surgery reduces this to about one percent. Wrinkles come out
>of intralase flaps much easier than blade flaps. Ingrowth is less likely
>to occur with intralase flaps. Striae are less likely with intralase
>flaps. There is greater accuracy of the correction when using intralase
>as compared to blade cut flaps. When the surgeon performs intralase, the
>flap cut is visualized the whole time, unlike when a surgeon does a blade
>cut. If the patient's eye rotates under the suction ring while a blade
>cut is being done, the surgeon is unknowingly left with a mess. If the
>eye rotates under the suction ring with intralase, it is visualized and
>can be repositioned without consequence. Therefore, many uncertainties
>are removed with the use of intralase. The advantages of intralase far
>outweigh any disadvantages.
Nothing "wrong" with intralase... but I would disagree that it is
better. It's more a marketing tool than anything else. It's primary
effect is to empty your bank account of more money. Surgeon's don't
use it wisely and make the flaps thinner than they ought to which
defeats the purpose of making a flap in the first place. Also, from
what I have heard, the edgies of an intralase flap make it very
difficult if not impossible to lift the flap if an enhancement needs
to be done.
The intralase corp is using Dr. Boothe to showcase their system... so
take what he says with a grain of salt.
I'm too lazy and tired to look it up right now... but how deep in
microns is the Bowman's layer? One advantage of LASIK vs PRK is that
the Bowman's layer is not lost with LASIK.
|
| |
|
|