|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > May 2005 > ...And Many Here Said Post-LASIK NightVision Not a Problem
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 |
...And Many Here Said Post-LASIK NightVision Not a Problem
|
|
| gospa68@aol.com 2005-05-18, 11:45 am |
| More evidence that potential LASIK patient's have been ill-informed
about post-LASIK problems.
And now for the retort....despite published reports that night vision
problems are highly prevalent (up to 50% of patients), there will be
some here who will confuse fiction with fact to convince people that
this has not been widespread problem.
Unfortunately, all who are in Ophthalmology have known about this
problem for years. Knowing and being forthright, however, are two
different issues. WK
First FDA-Approved LASIK System Designed to Reduce Nighttime Glare
Comes to Atlanta
Tuesday May 10, 8:02 am ET
Emory Laser Vision First Atlanta LASIK Center to Acquire Technology
Clinically Proven to Reduce Number-One Post-LASIK Complaint
ATLANTA--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 10, 2005--LASIK surgery to correct
nearsightedness and farsightedness continues to be the most popular
elective surgery in the United States. However, until recently, freedom
from glasses and contact lenses often came with a price: the potential
for LASIK-induced night vision problems--such as glare and halos--that
can affect an individual's ability to drive at night. According to a
report from the American Academy of Ophthalmology, poor night vision is
the most common potential complication of LASIK.
ADVERTISEMENT
Emory Laser Vision is the first Atlanta eye care center to offer the
ALLEGRETTO WAVE with PerfectPulse Technology(TM), the only FDA-approved
LASIK technology specifically built to address certain optical
distortions that are the chief cause of poor night time vision and
glare.
The ALLEGRETTO WAVE's PerfectPulse Technology automatically determines
each individual's unique pre-operative corneal curvature and provides a
treatment that not only corrects nearsightedness and farsightedness,
but also maintains the cornea's natural shape following treatment.
Unlike other conventional lasers that often provide an incomplete
treatment to the periphery of the cornea, PerfectPulse Technology
applies additional treatment to the outer part of the cornea to reduce
the likelihood of induced optical imperfections.
As a result, clinical studies submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) in 2003 demonstrated that nearly 90 percent of
patients had no increase in glare, halos and light sensitivity, and 20
percent of patients actually reported improved night vision after
treatment with this laser system.
"Since we acquired the ALLEGRETTO WAVE, we are hearing things from
patients treated with the Allegretto that we didn't hear with previous
technologies. They are returning on the day after surgery saying that
their vision is better than they ever had with glasses or contact
lenses," said Dr. Doyle Stulting, MD, PhD, Medical Director at Emory
Laser Vision.
"When I told people I was interested in having LASIK, they warned me
about blurred vision and night vision problems and said that I might
not be able to drive at night," said Stirling Spencer, director of
sales for an executive benefit firm in Atlanta. "But Dr. Stulting
alleviated my concerns by telling me about a new LASIK procedure that
put an end to these side effects. I couldn't be happier with the
results. My vision now is surprisingly better than it was before and
I'm seeing colors, details and images I wasn't even aware of. And I
don't have any glare or haloes--all the lights at night are pristine
and clear."
The ALLEGRETTO WAVE has been used successfully since the late 90s in
Europe, where it has been the leader in international sales for the
past three years. In the U.S., it was the first new laser platform to
be cleared by the FDA in nearly five years, and that clearance was for
the highest-ever ranges of nearsightedness and farsightedness.
ABOUT EMORY LASER VISION
Emory Laser Vision, which is located at the Emory Clinic Perimeter,
combines the academic prowess of the Emory Eye Center in the Department
of Ophthalmology at Emory university School of Medicine with a
state-of-the-art refractive surgery center. Surgeons from Emory Eye
Center participated in refractive surgery trials in the 1980's and
LASIK surgery trials in the 1990's. The Emory Eye Center remains at the
forefront of numerous other clinical trials, including studies on the
use of intraocular devices, corneal transplantation, macular
degeneration and glaucoma. Emory Eye Center was ranked as one of the
top 20 eye centers in the nation in the U.S. News & World Report's
annual survey of the nation's eye centers.
ABOUT THE ALLEGRETTO WAVE
The ALLEGRETTO WAVE, manufactured by WaveLight Laser Technologie, AG,
was the first refractive laser to receive concurrent approvals for the
treatment of myopia up to -12 diopters with astigmatism of up to -6
diopters and hyperopia up to +6 diopters with astigmatism of up to +5
diopters, not exceeding a mean spherical equivalent of +6 diopters. For
more information about the benefits and risks associated with this
product, please visit fda.gov or allegrettowave.com.
SOURCES
Steinert RF, Koch DD, Lane SS, Stulting RD. LASIK surgery screening
guidelines for patients. Eye Surgery education Council. Posted on
February 11, 2002 at http://www.furlongvision.com/feb-11-2002.html.
The Comprehensive Report on the Refractive Market, Market Scope, LLC,
October 2004.
Mrochen M, Seiler T. Influence of corneal curvature on calculation of
ablation patterns used in photorefractive laser surgery. Journal of
Refractive Surgery 2001;17:S584-S587.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-05-18, 11:45 am |
| I don't know, but it seems to me that improving on a procedure, even
one as successful as LASIK, PRK, etc., is a good idea. There will
never be a perfect surgery, so there will always be room for
improvement. The Wave Light Allegretto used in the US utilized
wavefront analysis to create a more prolate ablation profile. Outside
of the US the Allegretto is custom wavefront-guided. All improvements
on that which came before.
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.
| |
|
| In article <1115785822.576900.194450@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
gospa68@aol.com wrote:
> More evidence that potential LASIK patient's have been ill-informed
> about post-LASIK problems.
>
> And now for the retort....despite published reports that night vision
> problems are highly prevalent (up to 50% of patients), there will be
> some here who will confuse fiction with fact to convince people that
> this has not been widespread problem.
>
> Unfortunately, all who are in Ophthalmology have known about this
> problem for years. Knowing and being forthright, however, are two
> different issues. WK
This article spells good news. Why put a negative spin on it? It shows
that advancement in technology is addressing known and acknowledged
limitations of the previous technology. Hurray!
--
~RT
The truth lies somewhere between Ragnar and LASIKtruth
Two sides of the same coin
| |
| ycdbsoya 2005-05-18, 11:45 am |
| Apparently, it does nothing for those with post-op NVD. To be blunt,
it's no f'ing good news for me.
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-05-18, 11:45 am |
| It is and it isn't good news for people with night vision problems.
The Allegretto could be used for retreatment, but most doctors and
patients are looking to custom wavefront guided Complex Wavefront
Retreatment (CWR) for the spherical aberration problems that normally
causes night vision difficulty.
In Europe where Allegretto is custom wavefront guided, the Allegretto
is commonly used for CWR.
Here, the Visx S4, Bausch & Lomb Zyoptix, and Alcon LADARVision are
commonly used for CWR. I don't know that the European Allegretto
provides much different CWR results than the US three.
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.
| |
| gospa68@aol.com 2005-05-18, 11:46 am |
| You, RT, and Ragnar have the same refrain, "what is the problem about
making it better." You, RT, and Ragnar conveniently forget prior posts.
There is nothing wrong with improvements. What is wrong is for surgeons
to present a refractive surgery procedure as something it is not. You
do the same here. Patients need to be informed about outcomes, visual
aberrations (not complications by the famous FDA rule), and other
complications before they have surgery not afterwards when "the
something better" is being introduced.
WK
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-05-18, 11:46 am |
| Please cite any instance where I have stated refractive surgery is
something that it is not, and back that with fact.
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.
| |
|
| In article <1116105888.846258.219540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
gospa68@aol.com wrote:
> You, RT, and Ragnar have the same refrain, "what is the problem about
> making it better." You, RT, and Ragnar conveniently forget prior posts.
> There is nothing wrong with improvements. What is wrong is for surgeons
> to present a refractive surgery procedure as something it is not. You
> do the same here. Patients need to be informed about outcomes, visual
> aberrations (not complications by the famous FDA rule), and other
> complications before they have surgery not afterwards when "the
> something better" is being introduced.
I agree that what you propose would be ideal, but it's not realistic.
Anyone who believes that LASIK isn't a commercial product, like a
computer for example, or a car, is fooling themselves. What do you say
and do when a new and better model comes out a month after you've laid
out a few thousand bucks? Technology is always advancing. The
responsible and right thing to do is to fix that with the next, upgraded
version. An elective surgery, like LASIK, is a product. It is
aggressively marketed. It just so happens LASIK is performed by
"surgeons," but it is a product nonetheless. And a very profitable one
at that. It is not a "medical" procedure, nor is it surgery in the
sense that it cures disease or injury. It is an elective luxury, which
is why it is not held up to the same scrutiny as "medicine."
Caveat Emptor.
--
~RT
The truth lies somewhere between Ragnar and LASIKtruth
Two sides of the same coin
| |
|
| Also, people who get LASIK are not patients. They are consumers. WK,
your rhetoric confuses what's really happening here. It is not a
medical procedure. It is not surgery. It is an elective procedure that
happens to be performed by surgeons, although apparently optometrists
can perform Intralasik since it is all laser and doesn't involve a metal
blade.
--
~RT
The truth lies somewhere between Ragnar and LASIKtruth
Two sides of the same coin
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-05-18, 11:46 am |
| That would be optometrists in the state of Oklahoma, after attending
additional training.
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.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-05-18, 11:46 am |
| I don't disagree with you. At LVI, they mention nothing about any
potential problems until minutes before your surgery - and hours after
you have paid in full.
My own surgeon discussed everything with me personally on 3 different
occasions before having the surgery. He also has extensive
information in his waiting room about possible complications.
Let's not forget that LASIK has fewer complications than any other
surgery that has ever been done to any part of the body.
On 14 May 2005 14:24:48 -0700, gospa68@aol.com wrote:
>You, RT, and Ragnar have the same refrain, "what is the problem about
>making it better." You, RT, and Ragnar conveniently forget prior posts.
>There is nothing wrong with improvements. What is wrong is for surgeons
>to present a refractive surgery procedure as something it is not. You
>do the same here. Patients need to be informed about outcomes, visual
>aberrations (not complications by the famous FDA rule), and other
>complications before they have surgery not afterwards when "the
>something better" is being introduced.
>WK
| |
| serebel 2005-05-18, 11:46 am |
| Wizzer here is on his same old kick about consent again. He expects the
consent to be as thick as an anatomy book which is not only impossible
but unrealistic.
SErebel
| |
| Glenn - USAEyes.org 2005-05-18, 11:46 am |
| If the informed consent document becomes too unwieldy, it is too easy
to dismiss it as "legal necessity". That would be most unfortunate as
it contains important information for every patient.
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.
|
| |
|
|