UKC

Anyone had it done ??

I'm taking my daughter for her first consultation tomorrow afternoon. She's 25. We are going to the Optimax clinic in Leicester. I'd just like to know some of the more important questions that we'll need to ask about the whole procedure, and if you've had it done, how successful was it ??

Many thanks.

In reply to arch:
I've come across some horror stories of people ending up with vision which was like looking through plastic bags, but statistically it's more likely to go okay. Some people can end up with less than perfect vision when driving at night I gather, with 'halos' being seen around bright lights.

In reply to arch:

I went to Optimax in Manchester about 4 years ago, best thing I've ever done! I got their top treatment, buy one get one free on my eyes! Should have been circa £4k but paid £2k at 0% finance over 2 years. No pain at all, can't fault it in any way, feel free to drop me a message if you have any questions

Simon .

In reply to Timmd:

Out of curiosity, these horror stories, are they people that you actually know it is it just hear say?

In reply to maybe_si:

They're first hand accounts.

In reply to maybe_si:

I've always found 'buy one get one free' deals for laser eye surgery somewhat disconcerting.

In reply to maybe_si:


They're real: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LASIK#Risks

Another thing to be wary of is that people with keratoconus should not (as far as I know) undergo laser eye surgery (because their cornea is already weak and melting around like an ice lolly, blasting bits off with a laser is not going to make it magically stronger), however as I understand it - they will be only too happy to take your money even if you did have keratoconus...

In reply to Timmd:

Fair enough then, what a shame! I know so often that these stories get banded around as fact but are often Chinese whispers from friends of friends etc... All I can go from is my experience which was excellent.

In reply to arch:

I had it done when I was 30 (ish) about 15 years ago.
I went for the lasik where they slice the front off, zap it then put the front back.
Zero pain and went from a - 2.50 to - 0.25 in one eye and 0 in the other eye.
No pain or discomfort at all.

In my case there are a couple of things to note.

I could not drive in the dark for at least 2 weeks, the halo from an on coming Headlight would block the entire road, even now my eyes are a little more sensitive to light in the dark but nothing you can't cope with.

The second thing is my close vision, it is slightly impaired. Nothing that shows up on standard eye tests though. I can read the smallest of print but when doing engineering measuring using a vernier caliper I struggle to differenciate between the lines on the scale.
It was a good excuse to go digital.

Finally I don't know if this is true or not but my optician told me I would probably never need reading glasses but if I had it done I would need them in my mid 40's. I'm in my mid 40's now and don't need them yet but I don't think they are far away.
15 years of good eyesight is worth it though.

In reply to Timmd:

Out of curiosity, the plastic bag eyes person, how long ago was this? How are they now? Can they see? What happened?

In reply to Dax H:

In fairness, your optician is only describing the same loss of near vision that a person with normal distance vision would get at the same age. That is unavoidable: if you wore contact lenses for distance vision in middle age you would probably need to don reading glasses for close up work.

In reply to arch:

I haven't have it done, although I'm totally specs/CL dependent and have been offered it for free. Optical Express (a bunch of crooks - avoid) offer it to optometrists when they're training or if you go for a job with them. Obviously I come across a lot of patients who have had the surgery and I find out exactly how well it's turned out in terms of how good their vision is, and any other symptoms they experience.

I would say in general it's pretty good, but also, quite a lot can go wrong. In just a small sample of everyone I've met or tested that have had it, I would say very roughly that somewhere around 50-75% have no complaints. One case I know well started out similar to me (-6.00ish) and one year after surgery she can get by without specs but needs them to drive - she's now about -1. Persistent dry eye symptoms are common (no surprise since the corneal nerves are severed, and these are what tell you to blink and produce tears). Slightly crap vision - e.g. haloes round light when night driving is not common but not very rare either. I've see a couple of cases of annoyingly crap (slightly hazy) vision - plus some interesting ones where the change in the refraction (i.e. going from needing to not needing specs) has knocked some of the eye muscles out of whack so the two eyes sometimes give up working together as they should (something called decompensating phoria - not a serious condition, but annoying).

Personally, I'm perfectly happy with glasses and contact lenses, and if they're not working right I can change them. With correction, my vision is excellent as I'm a young healthy guy, although it is absolutely mega-shite without correction (I'm -6.00-odd plus astigmatism). I don't want my best corrected vision to be worse than what I have now and I don't want to risk anything that's going to cause permanent or semi-permanent symptoms.

So, in general, it's pretty good but the risks are not insignificant and your daughter may well just end up wearing glasses again after a bit (but likely with a smaller prescription).

I would ask:

- what % of patients achieve (uncorrected) VA of 6/4? (6/6 will be their success criteria, but as a healthy 25 year old, she probably sees 6/5 - a bit better than 6/6, or 6/4 two bits better than 6/6). This will tell her how likely it is that her vision after surgery will be as good as what she has now with correction. If she's seeing 6/4 in specs now and then goes to 6/6 she might be pissed off even though the company count it as a glorious success!

- what % of patients complain of dry eye symptoms after 1 month, 6 months, 12 months?

- what % of patients report visual symptoms e.g. haloes, loss of contrast sensitivity after 1, 6, 12 months?

- what % of patient still use (distance) specs 1 year, 2 years on.

- what % of would-be patients do they refuse to operate on due to risks of poor outcomes (you'll need to compare this to competitors to make sense of it. A low refusal rate is bad news - it means they take risks to get business!)

They probably won't be able to answer these questions. If I didn't get satisfactory answers to these questions, they wouldn't get my money and they certainly wouldn't be cutting any flaps in my corneas!

Hope that helps. If it puts you off, sorry! I think it's a good treatment, but it involves slicing though your daughter's corneas and burning the tissue inside in order to reshape them. That obviously entails risks, and the company has very strong incentives to minimise your knowledge and perception of those risks. Your daughter should be absolutely 100% aware of those risks, and at a minimum should be able to compare different companies'/surgeons' hard data on what they achieve.

Take your time, gather a lot of information and comb through it seriously. We're talking about slicing into your daughter's corneas here, it's worth some serious consideration.

Good luck,
Jon

In reply to arch:

I had mine done about 12 years ago, Optimax in Liverpool.

I was -7.something.

I had dry eyes for a while, which got better and back to normal after about 12 months, a small price to pay.

As an outdoor person, it was a revelation to not need glasses or to faff around with contacts on expeds, or deal with night nav issues in the rain.

I weighed up the risk based on my lifestyle and work and decided it was worth it.
I'd make the same decision again in a flash.

In reply to arch:

I've worked with several ophthalmologists who wore glasses, but none that had laser eye surgery. It's anecdotal but make of that what you will.

Remember when you go for a consultation this won't be like the NHS. It will be in their interest to sell your daughter the product, in this case a surgical procedure with potentially irreversible side effects. I'd be especially wary of finance deals and buy one get one free offers. You only get one set of corneas, but glasses can be replaced.

In reply to arch:

I had mine done 14 years ago, best money ever spent.

LD

In reply to arch:

My wife's (very rich ) cousin went to Harley Street several years ago, and even she has had ( having) severe problems, and is still getting corrective surgery costing thousands.

Whether the surgeon was to blame or her eyes took a bad reaction I don't know,but it has put any thoughts I might have had of getting it done , right out of my mind.

In reply to arch:

Wow. Thanks for the in depth replies, especially JS. I'll certainly be able to go in there with a little more knowledge about what I need to ask. My daughter hates wearing glasses and her prescription is pretty big, I'll show her this thread and hope she'll be able to make use of it.

In reply to Tony Jones:


That's what I thought too and I asked that specific question and he was adamant that I would probably never need reading glasses if I didn't get it done.
As I said I don't know if it's true or not and I certainly didn't believe it myself.

In reply to jezb1:




At the time I was heavily in to white water kayaking, glasses needed windscreen wipers and from time to time a contact would wash out.
The big one was work though. I work in a lot of dusty environments and a speck of dust on a contact feels like a shovel full of sand.

In reply to plyometrics:


Quite the opposite. Worth buying 2 while the offer's on

In reply to arch:

After having had glasses since I was 13 I had it done in 2011ish. I'm in the 'best thing I ever did' camp - I was -4.75/-5.25 and my vision remains perfect now.

My position after doing a fair bit of research was that if it goes well then probably any place will give you the same quality results, even the bargain basement places. What you need to think about is if it doesn't go well (which is unlikely, but does happen) - pick a place that makes you confident that they are willing and able to deal with the necessary aftercare and won't just fob you off.

The actual procedure is painless if a bit invasive feeling. Afterwards I did have noticeably dry eyes for probably a year (possibly more) afterwards and I used to have to try and avoid sitting under air conditioning/remember eye drops etc, but that hasn't been a problem for ages now.

Driving at night now requires a touch more concentration than it used to - bright lights against a dark background are not as easy to see clearly (this is caused because the dark environment causes your pupil to dilate to the point where the boundary between the treated and untreated areas of your cornea is in use) but it's not a problem to an extent that it's changed the way I do anything.

If I had the choice again I would absolutely do it again. I went to an expensive place and even with that in account it will have paid for itself in a couple more years in terms of glasses/lenses I've not had to buy, and the quality of life improvement is notable. I still remember lying in a bivvy bag on Dartmoor and being able to see the stars clearly for the first time.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Thanks for this info. I'm -9 and -6 (plus astigmatism) and have been looking into getting them fixed. Its very tempting to be able to be glasses/CL free (and to make reading glasses/bifocal options easier in the future) but the idea of my uncorrected vision being worse than currently is a big nono.

A few years ago I sat in on my then-boyfriend getting a consultation to get his eyes done, and it was definitely a sales pitch rather than an eye exam. Haven't seen such blatant sell sell sell in any other sales environment

In reply to Dax H:

It was true. If you're - 2.50 by 60 you end up with fixed focus eyes for work at 40cm, perfect for reading. As you know, your distance vision is shite, so rather than putting reading glasses on (as you will at that age now you're plano/no prescription), if you're around - 2.00 to - 4.00 you take your specs off to read. Having good distance vision is generally much more convenient!

In reply to arch:
Had it done at the Royal Eye Hospital in Manchester last year, best decision I ever made. A few things to note.

It's excruciatingly uncomfortable. Think 'Clockwork Orange'. She'll need help doing anything for at least 24 hours after the operation, including getting home.

Don't do anything on the cheap. When it comes to firing lasers at your eyes, Expensive = Good.

She will, most likely, end up with 'normal' vision. That means that like almost everyone else she'll need reading glasses when she gets older. My close vision is slightly worse than it was before the op, but that's because I was short sighted, and now my close up vision is like everyone else at my age (late 30s)

She may end up with 'halo' artefacts around bright objects. I still see them more than a year after my operation, but your brain adapts. I have to concentrate to see them.

After the op, tell her to go somewhere with a good night sky. The stars!

In reply to mik82:


Well that's a little unfair. It is in their interest to maintain their professional reputation. If you have money to spend on an expensive and potentially risky cosmetic procedure, it makes sense to seek out the best treatment available. I ended up getting treatment in Manchester, but I would happily have travelled abroad if it meant getting better treatment. Surgeons know that their reputations and patient history are only a Google away. It is in their interest to not sell you a product if they know there is a high risk of later negative repercussions.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

As an optometrist, isn't your sample a bit biased? That is, aren't you more likely to see people who have had the surgery and then had subsequent problems, than you are to see those who have no complaints ( I haven't been to see an optometrist since I had the surgery )?

I'd also disagree that it's in the interest of surgeries to hide the risks, for the reasons I stated above.

In reply to planetmarshall:



I know from family experience ( see earlier post) that even very very expensive =no guarantee of successes , and in fact can mean years of pain and further operations ( and even more money)

Perhaps better to try and get the name of a particular surgeon that people ( ideally that you know ) are happy to vouch for.
That will not necessarily mean paying huge amounts of money, but may mean delays ( as they may be in great demand)

In reply to Jim C:



There are no guarantees with anything, and even a personal recommendation is just anecdotal evidence either way (as are all the experiences on this thread). I'd sooner rely on a larger sample of statistics for a given procedure.

In reply to planetmarshall:

That is why I queried the " expensive=Good"

...and even a personal recommendation is just anecdotal evidence either way (as are all the experiences on this thread).
I'd sooner rely on a larger sample of statistics for a given procedure.

Not sure what you mean?
larger sample stats for a given procedure carried out by a particular surgeon, or the stats for a particular clinic, or hospital , or what?

In reply to maybe_si:


It was Michael Hutchence, he could only see plastic bags. Granted, it was erotic auto-asphyxiation games.

In reply to Jim C:


Well your wife's cousin's experience is not necessarily indicative of a wider trend. It could be an isolated incident. It could be par for the course for that particular surgeon ( in which case I wouldn't expect him to be in business for very long ). Statistics for the procedure in general are available, however. ( for example - https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/SurgeryandL... ).

In summary, so few patients in the quoted study reported significant problems (less than 1%) that the planned follow up study ( to establish predictors of post-op LASIK problems ) was never done. While it's interesting to hear about other people's experiences, and I'm happy to share my own, if I was going to do it again I'd give much much more weight to a clinical study done by the FDA than I would, with all due respect, to the experience of a UKC user's wife's cousin.

In reply to arch:

Didn't have this information last night. My daughters prescription is

Right eye. +1.00 SPH -1.50 CYL
Left eye. +1.00 SPH -1.75 CYL

Doesn't seem a lot compared to some on here, but she is adamant she wants the procedure done.

In reply to arch:




Hmm. Seems like potentially a lot of money and risk to correct quite a mild prescription, but I guess it's the value to her that's important.

One point in reference to something someone said above - having this correction absolutely will not prevent long sightedness from occurring as she gets older. Shortsightedness and longsightedness have two different causes (If I remember, the former is the muscles that manipulate the cornea not focusing the light at the correct point on the retina while the second is the cornea losing flexibility as you get older) and fixing shortsightedness does nothing to prevent longsightedness later.

Having correction will also not stop any ongoing degradation of her vision - so if her prescription is still getting worse then she could find that a short sightedness prescription is required again in a few years. I had mine done when I was 30 as that was supposedly a good time to avoid more shortsightedness developing while still getting a good few years before long sightedness starts to develop.

In reply to arch:

My wife had it done. She also suffered from 'halo' vision previously, and they did something to fix that too. She falls into the 'best thing ever' camp, though 8 years later, her vision is not beginning to deteriorate again due to the natural aging process. One of the big pluses was that she could identify her children from other children when she was in the swimming pool!

My brother in law also had it done, I'm guessing 10 years ago. It wasn't a success, ending up with the plastic bag vision - though a second operation did seem to sort that.

In short, the best advice would be a) answer all questions as honestly and cautiously as possible. That seems obvious, but I think a lot of people for whom it went wrong perhaps shouldn't have had the procedure but somehow went through checks. and b) go to the best place possible, not the place that happens to have the offer. But these are obvious things, nothing particularly insightful.

In reply to arch:

I had mine done with Optimax, in Finchley Rd, back in 2007. I had both eyes which were both -5.50 or thereabouts done at the same time, and couldn't have asked for better results. The first day after surgery, my eyes were a bit gritty, and for 7 days I had to wear shields at night (to ensure that I didn't rub my eyes), as well as use eye drops to keep the eyes lubricated. The operation certainly wasn't painful, and not particularly uncomfortable either. I did have to wear sunglasses home that evening, and my eyes were quite sensitive to bright line for a while afterwards. This included on-coming headlights at night, so it's worth avoiding having to drive at night for a while.

Overall, I was surprised how quick and efficient the whole process was, and 10 years on still think it was one of the best things I have spent money on. Getting it done has meant being able to pass the medical test for driving minibuses and no longer needing contact lenses or glasses, so it's paid for itself many times over.

In reply to arch:

Research who are the best practitioners Best thing I ever did for outdoor sports but definitely not cheap

In reply to arch:
Before getting it done I talked it over with my optician who was nothing to do with the company I used and at the time I was paying him £40 a month for daily disposable contact lenses so it was in his interests to keep me as a customer.
He told me that statistically I was more likely to have eye problems as a result of wearing contact lenses and poking my fingers in my eyes every day than I was with the operation going bad.
Again if that is true or not I don't know.
I do know that in 10+ years of contacts I had 2 eye infections (one quite bad) and in 15 years since being zapped I have been fine.

I forgot earlier, my sister in law also had it done.
I don't know what her prescription was but she wore real thick coke bottle bottom type lenses in her glasses.
The first go for her wasn't great, no problems as such but still very short sighted but the second go was fine.

Edited to add.
A friend had it done around the same time as me. Improved her vision to not need glasses but she can't drive in the dark anymore and won't chance a second go to correct things in case it gets worse.

In reply to mullermn:

Yeah


I would concur.

I suspect that there are some patients with bigger prescriptions who might view those figures as a successful outcome. There are probably many folk who muddle along without any correction for most tasks (outside of driving) at that level of impairment. Perhaps the best advice might be to leave it a while, given that the increase in short-sightedness slows by the time a person reaches their late twenties in most cases. Hopefully Jon Stewart might be along soon as he is far more qualified to advise on this.

In reply to arch:

Well back home now after a far from pleasant journey into and out of Leicester. (I'm not a city person, far too many people and cars about)

I'm a naturally sceptical sort of person, but I'll admit to being won over. All my questions were answered, not always in an understandable manor but we got there in the end. We weren't given the hard sell, we were given details of the Surgeon and how many procedures she has completed. We were told which one of the operations would suit Georgina the best. We were even given a list of patients who were happy to be contacted about their procedures (Not sure they're real, but wont be contacting them anyway) and we were told the success rate.

So, a Lasik Intralase and Wavefront procedure on both eyes for £3390

I'm pretty sure Georgina will go for it. I wasn't sure before the appointment, I feel a little better about it now. We will discuss it over the weekend.



Thank you all for the replies. This is IMO what makes this forum so good.

Arch.

In reply to arch:

Getting my eyes zapped was the best thing I have ever done!! Well second best but that doesn't count now

In reply to arch:

Had it done - best thing ever cost around £1800 for both eyes no after effect other than perfect vision.

In reply to arch:

I got lasik done when I was 18. I'm now 25 and it's been bloody brilliant. Being able to see without glasses is just fantastic. I recommend it to everyone.

The whole chopping the top bit of the eye and peeling it back was pretty unpleasant at the time though.

In reply to planetmarshall:


Yes, that's true. But about half of my sample is people in the industry who've had it rather than patients, and the problems I've seen I've listed above. It's not a big sample and I've seen all those problems - I can't give %s but the risks of sub-optimal outcomes are significant.

As I said, I think it's a good treatment and for many people the benefits will outweigh the risks. But it's absolutely crucial to be fully informed of those risks before paying someone a couple of grand to cut a flap out of your cornea.


You're being far too optimistic. They want to get as many treated people as possible - that's their business. If they gave the answers upfront to all the questions I posed, that would have a negative impact on their bottom line, so they won't do it. It will vary significantly between companies of course, but the worst will be atrocious, as indicated by mik82.

In reply to ad111:


I thought it was rather cool to be honest.
I will admit I was totally bricking it and came very close to bottling it as they took me to the operating room.

When they applied the vacuum eyeball retainer my vision faded to a spot then darkness like an old crt TV being turned off.

I could hear the motor driven cutter but couldn't feel it then they removed the retainer and my vision came back and was the same as always.
I watched the forceps approach and then the flap was peeled back and everything was a complete blur.

Then they positioned the laser and told me to lay still and look directly up. What they didn't tell me was the crackling noise from the laser, it made me jump a bit but the tracking thing cut off the laser before my eye moved enough to be detrimental. Burning eyeball smells like burning hair.

After the zap they flushed my eye with Saline and folded the flap back and wriggled it about with a steel prodded to settle it in place and remove any air bubbles.
I could see again at this point, not very well but good enough.

They then popped an eye shield on and did my other eye.

It was all very interesting from a mechanical point of view.
About 10 minutes later I was sitting in the dark recovery room with less than perfect vision but already a lot better than it was 15 minutes earlier.

In reply to planetmarshall:
Your reading of that study seems a bit rose tinted to me.

For 1%, the outcome was absolutely shite: experienced "a lot of difficulty" with or inability to do usual activities without corrective lenses because of any one visual symptom (starbursts, ghosting, halos, glare) after LASIK surgery

But 5% (or 4.something) weren't satisfied. That's probably the take home number - 1 in 20 don't get the result they want. Might be worth the risk, might not be, depends what the benefits are for the inividual. If CLs are impractical (e.g. kayaking), the benefits are massive. If like me you have no problem with CLs, I think a 1 in 20 risk is a bit too much (and for me, that's not including the cost as I can have it for free).

We've got 30% with dry eye Sx at 3 months and we know it can often last a year or so - so combine that with the visual outcomes and my guess of 50-75% with no complaints is looking about right.

In reply to Jim C:


Can you get insurance pre-procedure that will cover you for unintended complications?

In reply to Siward:


No idea, but the money if never the big issue when things go wrong. ( but I can understand that it will be useful if you were off work)
I see from a Google search that surgeons can get insurance against claims, so I guess they get sued.

In reply to Dax H:

It was interesting.

I think the key issue for me was my lack of questioning the procedure beforehand. I'd wanted it done ever since I got glasses at 12. When I was finally in a position to get the eyes lasered I was so excited about being able to see perfectly that in my mind I had forgotten there was a surgery to go through first. So I walked into the hospital happily, they asked me if I wanted a nurse in there to hold my hand - I said "Hell no", thinking "I'm a man" etc and walked out out of the recovery room 20 minutes later pale and shaking.

I never got an eyeball vacuum retainer - I saw it all. And the bits that stay in my memory is them using a Clockwork Orange style set of clamps to hold my eyes open, the peeling back of the surface of the eye and then the smell of burning eye.