LASIK surgery

[piehead]

4 hours ago, Brad Pitt said:

Can you expand on what is "Super sight" ? 

total lens replacements.

[DaffyDuck]

So, this sounds like the proverbial “too good to be true” solution - 20/20 vision, and no reading glasses needed.

Yes, granted, with a total lens replacement, there IS an alteration of the existing eye structure - but if it delivers, what’s the downside? Any thoughts on this one, Brad?

Bangkok Pattaya Hospital.

[Brad Pitt]

19 hours ago, forcebwithu said:

IOL procedure. Bangkok-Pattaya Hospital offers Super Sight.
https://www.bangkokpattayahospital.com/en/healthcare-services-en/lasik-and-supersight-surgery-center-en.html

 

"Supersight" is just a fancy name they've decided to give it. The procedure is the same as a "Multifocal IOL" lens replacement. Multifocal lens (addressed post #116 in this thread). Interview w/ Dr. Somchai about the lens/procedure: 

 

[Brad Pitt]

The lens they're calling "Supersight": https://www.zeiss.com/meditec/int/products/ophthalmology-optometry/cataract/iol-implantation/mics-platform/mics-preloaded-trifocal-iol/at-lisa-tri-family/at-lisa-tri-family-product-details.html#optic-design

Just a regular Zeiss "Multifocal" IOL. There is also an astigmatic/toric version listed. It's easier to correct Astigmatism w/ a LASIK procedure but, that would require a 2nd procedure as opposed to the straight forward lens removal & replacement (no change to your Cornea). Pitfalls, potential side effects and success's basically the same as we've discussed. I've discussed & posted my frustrations w/ them as well as other's rebutting their happiness w/ them. -Up to you !?! 

[DaffyDuck]

Never mind then, the moment it was the same as a multifocal implant, it’d have the same issues - ie lesser clarity, then? Even if it is a full lens replacement (we were discussing the complementary lens implanted under the iris)?

[piehead]

like i said before my wife had it 10 years ago and she is 100 % happy with it . NO side effects and 20/20 vision until she dies.

[sulu]

10 hours ago, DaffyDuck said:

Never mind then, the moment it was the same as a multifocal implant, it’d have the same issues - ie lesser clarity, then? Even if it is a full lens replacement (we were discussing the complementary lens implanted under the iris)?

Daffy my friend, I was at least as askeered of having anybody mess with my eyes as you appear to be. Can't blame you. Losing my sight would be about the worst thing I could think of.

 

FWIW I had Lasik done at the turn of the century (God that sounds like a long time ago LMAO).

 

I've worn glasses since I was 10 and was always afraid I'd go blind early in my life as the optometrist, when giving me my first glasses, told my mother and I, "His vision will never get better. It'll only get worse". Now what he MEANT was "until he's around 18. After he's full grown it'll only get a little worse over time, he will not go blind". Moral ? Gotta be careful what you say to kids.

 

Into my 40's and then I couldn't read. Tried bifocals and hated 'em. Went with multiple pairs of glasses. Really good ones for reading the computer on my desk and a foldable pair to keep in my pants pocket. And a pair for distance. PITA.

 

Anywho, circa 1999, the internet was around in force and I, who wasn't going to let anybody get near my eyes, began to look into the pros and cons of Lasik. Having had to wear glasses all my life participating in all sorts of sports, the thought of being able to see (distance) without glasses was actually thrilling. I knew I'd still need reading glasses but,,,,,,,,,

 

An eye doctor mentioned monovision and gave me several pairs of contact lenses to simulate monovision - 1 eye for distance and the other for reading. Hated it. Same as bifocals. Couldn't get used to it. Just like the bifocals I was always "in between". Never here nor there. Made me a little dizzy besides. Didn't even try them for sports/golf.

 

Given the odds of success (LASIK) in my case, I decided to go for distance and deal with reading glasses.

 

As I understood it, one's distance vision is related to the focal length from the cornea to the retina (as explained by BP). LASIK corrects this length. And since you won't grow anymore it should be permanent (although in some cases you might need a "touch up" a while afterward - I didn't). Reading/near vision is determined by the flexibility (or lack thereof) of our LENS. Unlike our dicks, which get softer as we age, the lens gets stiffer (everything backwards, eh ? LMAO). The lens, which used to flex to turn near vision into distance vision (and everything in between) and near vision, no longer does its job. Ergo, you need reading glasses. LASIK does NOT correct this.

 

So I had it done. Both eyes at the same time. Damn the torpedoes. 15-20 minutes in the chair, another 20-30 in a dark room and out into the light (with eye protection of course). Driven home by my girlfriend and rested most of the rest of the day and voila' 20/20 vision. It was like a NEW WORLD. Some glare/starburst effect, especially at night but that went away within a couple of weeks (IIRC - it wasn't a long time).

 

3 years ago I began to realize the world was getting "foggy". Yup, I needed cataract surgery. The eye doc went through the lens alternatives BUT, since I couldn't get the original specs for my LASIK he "couldn't" (wouldn't ?) recommend/do any of the multi-focal lenses. They were a couple of grand each over and above what medicare would pay for anyway (Medicare would only pay for the normal clear lenses, nothing more "exotic" . So, having used reading glasses for over 20 years and being very used to needing to carry them around, I just got the clear ones. No big deal carrying a folding pair of reading glasses with me to read on the run. And I keep a pair of good reading glasses right next to the computer as I have for many years. No biggie.

 

Cataracts were done 6 weeks apart though. Easy peasy. About 30 minutes as an out patient and a check up the next day and all was clear again. 

 

I would highly recommend LASIK IF you're a good candidate.

 

Good luck.

 

 

 

 

[Biennial]

Why can't they make flexible lenses just like our natural young lenses? Any research in that possibility?

[Biennial]

2 minutes ago, Biennial said:

Why can't they make flexible lenses just like our natural young lenses? Any research in that possibility?

I found this: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/14/polymer_nanolayer_lenses/

 

[DaffyDuck]

1 hour ago, sulu said:

Daffy my friend, I was at least as askeered of having anybody mess with my eyes as you appear to be. Can't blame you. Losing my sight would be about the worst thing I could think of.

(...)

I would highly recommend LASIK IF you're a good candidate.

Thanks for sharing your experiences -- yeah, my hangup is that I don't want to compromise. My near-vision is near perfect (I think), and I absolutely do not want to have to use reading glasses. Yeah, I know, it's a hangup of mine.

So, the quest continues.

[Brad Pitt]

On ‎1‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 11:20, Biennial said:

Why can't they make flexible lenses just like our natural young lenses? Any research in that possibility?

$hit, why didn't I think of that: flexible lens = problem solved!     Winner, winner Chicken dinner! 

Now, if it were just that simple. The way the structure works: the lens is in a capsular membrane (about the tensile strength of plastic wrap). The capsule and lens are both flexible. The capsule keeps the lens in place. The membrane is connected to a round muscle (Ciliary body) w/ a bunch of fibers (Zonules). As the Ciliary body contracts it pulls the zonules tighter and the lens is forced to become stretched (and thinner in the center) for your distance vision. The reverse: the Ciliary body relaxes, it relaxes the tension on the zonules and the Lens is allowed to get smaller (& fatter in the center) for your close vision. 

With that said: when we do Cataract surgery (lens replacement) we have to remove a portion of the front of the capsule (rhexis) to access the Lens itself. Once the Capsule is breached it no longer possesses the strength or integrity to expand or contract. We do leave a large portion on the Capsule intact but, that is just to hold the new lens in place. I'll post up my little reference eye photo again so you can visually associate the above explanation.  

[Brad Pitt]

For anyone interested (not the faint of heart), here is a link to my favorite Cataract removal technique (You can observe the rhexis I mention in the post above): 

 

[Biennial]

57 minutes ago, Brad Pitt said:

$hit, why didn't I think of that: flexible lens = problem solved!     Winner, winner Chicken dinner! 

Now, if it were just that simple. The way the structure works: the lens is in a capsular membrane (about the tensile strength of plastic wrap). The capsule and lens are both flexible. The capsule keeps the lens in place. The membrane is connected to a round muscle (Ciliary body) w/ a bunch of fibers (Zonules). As the Ciliary body contracts it pulls the zonules tighter and the lens is forced to become stretched (and thinner in the center) for your distance vision. The reverse: the Ciliary body relaxes, it relaxes the tension on the zonules and the Lens is allowed to get smaller (& fatter in the center) for your close vision. 

With that said: when we do Cataract surgery (lens replacement) we have to remove a portion of the front of the capsule (rhexis) to access the Lens itself. Once the Capsule is breached it no longer possesses the strength or integrity to expand or contract. We do leave a large portion on the Capsule intact but, that is just to hold the new lens in place. I'll post up my little reference eye photo again so you can visually associate the above explanation.  

Thanks for the explanation.

[Brad Pitt]

31 minutes ago, Biennial said:

Thanks for the explanation.

Back to the "Drawing board" amigo ! ;-)

[Biennial]

1 hour ago, Brad Pitt said:

For anyone interested (not the faint of heart), here is a link to my favorite Cataract removal technique (You can observe the rhexis I mention in the post above): 

 

Do you let your patients watch this video before their cataract surgery? Anyone back out?

[Brad Pitt]

48 minutes ago, Biennial said:

Do you let your patients watch this video before their cataract surgery?

Short answer: No.            Long answer: "Hell no!".

I differ that question to the Cataract surgeon. I have a lot of patients that need Cataract surgery 1.) Because I can't see to treat their Retina & 2.) Because their ready. They start asking all kinds of questions: how long does it take, what is the recovery time, is it done in the Hospital - will I have to stay over night etc. . 

I simply send them back to the Ophthalmologist that referred them to me or suggest someone that I know (in their area) who is a great surgeon & suggest that they pursue the answers from their "Cataract surgeon". Great question ! ;-)

[DaffyDuck]

Dude, that video just gave me nightmares.

It’s like shades of “Un Chien Andaloux” all over again.

So, different question, if my near sightedness (and lack of far sight) is caused by the shape of my eyeball, can’t I just figure out some way to squeeze it into shape? I don’t know, like press on it therapeutically (no, I’m not going to start experimenting), but has something like that been considered in research?

[piehead]

what a total crap is talked about in this topic if you want 20/20 vision have super sign  at bangkok pattaya hospital full stop. done it got the tee shirt is the bees knees . 

[Biennial]

15 hours ago, Brad Pitt said:

Short answer: No.            Long answer: "Hell no!".

I differ that question to the Cataract surgeon. I have a lot of patients that need Cataract surgery 1.) Because I can't see to treat their Retina & 2.) Because their ready. They start asking all kinds of questions: how long does it take, what is the recovery time, is it done in the Hospital - will I have to stay over night etc. . 

I simply send them back to the Ophthalmologist that referred them to me or suggest someone that I know (in their area) who is a great surgeon & suggest that they pursue the answers from their "Cataract surgeon". Great question ! ;-)

Thanks  Another question - would you ever have 1. Lasik 2. Cataract surgery? If not, why not?

Seems like eye doctors shy away from eye surgery.

[Brad Pitt]

19 hours ago, DaffyDuck said:

Dude, that video just gave me nightmares.

It’s like shades of “Un Chien Andaloux” all over again.

So, different question, if my near sightedness (and lack of far sight) is caused by the shape of my eyeball, can’t I just figure out some way to squeeze it into shape? I don’t know, like press on it therapeutically (no, I’m not going to start experimenting), but has something like that been considered in research?

Yeah Daff, look up Orthokeratology on youtube for some reviews. It's the practice of wearing Contact lenses while you sleep that are either too steep or to flat to alter the shape of your Cornea. Something like Dental braces for your eyes. P.S. "Sweet dreams" !!! 

[Brad Pitt]

6 hours ago, Biennial said:

Thanks  Another question - would you ever have 1. Lasik 2. Cataract surgery? If not, why not?

Seems like eye doctors shy away from eye surgery.

Actually I would "if" I needed it: I wear a -1.50 lens in either eye for distance (driving or if I want sharp vision watching TV). I don't wear glasses when I work @ -1.50 I don't really need a lot of correction, I can see the clock on the wall 20ft. away w/o any glasses (it's readable but, not crystal clear). 

Now that I'm 53 (almost 54) which would indicate that my own lens has less ability to accommodate for near. For near, I need about a +1.50 lens. I have a pair of glasses & sun glasses in the car as well as a pair sitting on the coffee table for watching TV. For reading I simply remove my -1.50 lenses in effect adding +1.50. That make any sense?

I could get LASIK for distance but, then I'd loose the ability to remove my -1.50 and getting the benefit of loosing them for reading. I'd need reading glasses all the time. At -1.50 I get the best of both worlds w/ just Distance glasses. If I didn't need the -1.50's at my age I'd need reading glasses for sure! See post #115 pg. 5 of this thread (last 3 paragraphs) explaining the difference of -Lenses vs +Lenses for an explanation (of how the lenses work for Distance vs Near). 

[DaffyDuck]

Yeah, I’m in a similar boat with my 1.25


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DaffyDuck]

what a total crap is talked about in this topic if you want 20/20 vision have super sign  at bangkok pattaya hospital full stop. done it got the tee shirt is the bees knees . 

How old are you?

What was your vision like previously?

Do you need reading glasses or how is your near vision?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Sculptor]

7 hours ago, piehead said:

what a total crap is talked about in this topic if you want 20/20 vision have super sign  at bangkok pattaya hospital full stop. done it got the tee shirt is the bees knees . 

would love to hear the details of your experience with this surgical procedure

[Bonkabit]

Eye specialist in clinic in Melbourne said that laser sight correction surgery is not usually recommended once the patient is over 30 years of age.

I am well over, I had wondered if it might be an option for me.