Laser eye treatment - who's done it?

Wife had hers done at London vision clinic about a year and a half ago, cost me a fortune but they came so highly rated I think it was worth the premium.

She is ecstatic with the results, she has better than 20/20 vision now and they were good to deal with too.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree that if your correction is on the low side (say -3 or lower) then having ortho-k is by far a safer option. Bit more faff but in the end you can go glasses free when you're awake, and it is completely reversible should any complications occur.

I'd only jump for the laser if that option doesn't work.
 
Tephnos said:
I have to agree that if your correction is on the low side (say -3 or lower) then having ortho-k is by far a safer option. Bit more faff but in the end you can go glasses free when you're awake, and it is completely reversible should any complications occur.

I'd only jump for the laser if that option doesn't work.
Click to expand...

It's a different sort of risk, putting anything into your eyes carries a risk of infection. Doing it every day for the rest of your life compounds the risk. Ortho-k have a higher risk of infection than normal contact lenses (all RGP lenses are). Putting them in and out of your eyes also carries a risk of injury to the eye, again this is higher for RGP lenses than soft contacts.

Statistically, wearing even soft contacts daily is orders of magnitude riskier than laser vision correction.
 
HACO said:
It's a different sort of risk, putting anything into your eyes carries a risk of infection. Doing it every day for the rest of your life compounds the risk. Ortho-k have a higher risk of infection than normal contact lenses (all RGP lenses are). Putting them in and out of your eyes also carries a risk of injury to the eye, again this is higher for RGP lenses than soft contacts.

Statistically, wearing even soft contacts daily is orders of magnitude riskier than laser vision correction.
Click to expand...

I have yet to meet a good eye surgeon who would recommend doing surgery unless you had exhausted all other options.

Infections can be a risk with improper care of lenses, but you are very much downplaying the drastic ness of permanent surgery here.
 
Tephnos said:
I have yet to meet a good eye surgeon who would recommend doing surgery unless you had exhausted all other options.
Click to expand...

It's an elective surgery, there are no "exhausting all other options", and as far as refractive surgeries go, laser vision correction is the least invasive and risky (i.e. "other options" such as ICL, RLE, etc are much more invasive). I'm guessing you not having met them is down to the fact that you haven't met a lot of eye surgeons (me neither, there are only about 1500 ophthalmologists in the UK).

It's the world's most common elective surgery and it's performed by ophthalmologists on people that have other options, so naturally actual ophthalmologists, whether you've met them or not, don't consider it too risky to perform on the average person.
 
HACO said:
It's an elective surgery, there are no "exhausting all other options", and as far as refractive surgeries go, laser vision correction is the least invasive and risky (i.e. "other options" such as ICL, RLE, etc are much more invasive). I'm guessing you not having met them is down to the fact that you haven't met a lot of eye surgeons (me neither, there are only about 1500 ophthalmologists in the UK).

It's the world's most common elective surgery and it's performed by ophthalmologists on people that have other options, so naturally actual ophthalmologists, whether you've met them or not, don't consider it too risky to perform on the average person.
Click to expand...

I do frequent forums of ophthalmologists, and they definitely do not make it as virtually risk-free as you're making it out to be. You haven't mentioned the risk of floaters from the surgery (which is a thing), you haven't mentioned that an operation is considered successful if the patient achieves good chart vision, but if they claim to have night vision issues or some other forms of aberration it doesn't matter - still noted as successful as their vision technically has improved, which completely throws off your statistics. These issues can't always be negated by a decent surgeon either.

Most people tend to have their vision corrected on the cheap at chain brands as well, so there's a reason I did say 'good' doctors.
 
Tephnos said:
I do frequent forums of ophthalmologists, and they definitely do not make it as virtually risk-free as you're making it out to be.
Click to expand...

I never said it's risk-free though. Only that other ways to correct vision have risks as well, and apart from glasses they can be and often are riskier over a lifetime. For example, people don't go blind from laser eye surgery (zero case reported in history), people do go blind from infections or injuries caused by soft and hard contact lens use every single year.

I'm sure in those ophthalmologists forums you've seen these complications from contacts, so why are you downplaying them? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You see I can play this game as well!

Tephnos said:
You haven't mentioned the risk of floaters from the surgery (which is a thing), you haven't mentioned that an operation is considered successful if the patient achieves good chart vision, but if they claim to have night vision issues or some other forms of aberration it doesn't matter - still noted as successful as their vision technically has improved, which completely throws off your statistics. These issues can't always be negated by a decent surgeon either.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that list is a lot longer, a lot can go wrong with anything. I also DID mention some of these just last page!

Do you want to look at FDA's entry on contact lens risks? Or horror stories? Just Google "I went blind from contact lenses" and you'll get a ton of reports from reputable sources. I can easily say you haven't mentioned infections, corneal ulcers, epithelial damage, corneal aberrations, etc etc. That doesn't even begin with traumatic injury with contacts in the eye (which significantly compounds the damage), etc.

However despite all of this, contact lenses are safe and effective. There's no reason to fearmonger. You do the basic precautions and best safety practices and you avoid most risks, the same is true of laser eye surgery. If you go to a reputable clinic, they do their pre-operative tests completely and choose the right procedure for your eyes, the risks are incredibly low.

Tephnos said:
Most people tend to have their vision corrected on the cheap at chain brands as well, so there's a reason I did say 'good' doctors.
Click to expand...

No arguments there, I've never recommended people to cheap out or go to chains. They're pretty bad.

Tephnos said:
so there's a reason I did say 'good' doctors.
Click to expand...

So are you claiming the ophthalmologists in the world who perform laser vision correction are "bad" doctors? Any evidence to back that up?
 
HACO said:
The whole "X datapoints" is pure marketing. The VISX platform (the actual laser that both all OpticalExpress and most Ultralase braches use) is pretty outdated and low resolution compared to modern lasers, and "wavefront-guided" makes no difference to 99% of the patients, and the other 1% already have awful vision (e.g. they don't see 20/20 or even 20/30 with glasses). A surgeon who knows what they're doing is worth a million times more than these marketing gimmicks. Chain surgeons are often at the beginning of their careers, once they do 5000 or more eyes they go to independent clinics or setup their own. They're fine for routine cases, but clearly you weren't eligible for LASIK so go to better clinics.

At that price just go to LVC. Their technology is even more accurate than high street chains and their surgeons are world-renowned.
Click to expand...

My vision is meant to be pretty good, next up from 20/20 (25/20 or 30/20?). The surgeon who will do my surgery has done 47,000 surgeries, seems pretty good. LCV seems even more expensive, plus it's in London, so not very doable..
 
M1k3H said:
My vision is meant to be pretty good, next up from 20/20 (25/20 or 30/20?). The surgeon who will do my surgery has done 47,000 surgeries, seems pretty good. LCV seems even more expensive, plus it's in London, so not very doable..
Click to expand...

Next up from 20/20 is 20/16. 47,000 is pretty good, so you're probably in very good hands.
 
ChrisD. said:
To be honest you barely see/speak to him as you’re in and out in under 15 minutes. I’ve had no issues since my surgery.
Click to expand...

Okay, I figured as much! Good to hear though! Waiting for a call back to book my slot. I imagine with their head office being in Glasgow, they've been snowed in and won't be working today.
 
Had my surgery booked for yesterday. Re-did the scans and went to the operating waiting area. Surgeon came over and asked to talk to me. He told me I am not suitable. He even called head office to get a second opinion. Apparently, the shape of my cornea points to a possibility of getting Pellucid Eye Disease in future, and the surgery would increase that possibility.

He told me the disease is progressive, albeit slowly; so I should go back in 1 year. If the shape of my eye has not worsen, then it means I am at a much lower risk of getting Pellucid and could be suitable for the surgery.

Not sure if I should phone my GP and get checked. I did go straight to Specsavers (I was in town plus I need new glasses as the frame is falling apart) and had their 'enhanced' eye check. I was told my eyes are healthy, so not sure what the GP can do for me. NHS website points towards 'high street opticians' for eye checks anyway.
 
M1k3H said:
Had my surgery booked for yesterday. Re-did the scans and went to the operating waiting area. Surgeon came over and asked to talk to me. He told me I am not suitable. He even called head office to get a second opinion. Apparently, the shape of my cornea points to a possibility of getting Pellucid Eye Disease in future, and the surgery would increase that possibility.

He told me the disease is progressive, albeit slowly; so I should go back in 1 year. If the shape of my eye has not worsen, then it means I am at a much lower risk of getting Pellucid and could be suitable for the surgery.

Not sure if I should phone my GP and get checked. I did go straight to Specsavers (I was in town plus I need new glasses as the frame is falling apart) and had their 'enhanced' eye check. I was told my eyes are healthy, so not sure what the GP can do for me. NHS website points towards 'high street opticians' for eye checks anyway.
Click to expand...

Talk to your GP. They will refer you to an ophthalmologist who can do a full ophthalmic exam (which is much more comprehensive than what you get at the high street opticians).
 
HACO said:
Talk to your GP. They will refer you to an ophthalmologist who can do a full ophthalmic exam (which is much more comprehensive than what you get at the high street opticians).
Click to expand...

Just phoned the GP. Was told to go to a high street optician. 'They specialise in eyes', apparently.... Who knew?

Will call up another branch and explain to them I already have scans and just need a referral.
 
M1k3H said:
Just phoned the GP. Was told to go to a high street optician. 'They specialise in eyes', apparently.... Who knew?

Will call up another branch and explain to them I already have scans and just need a referral.
Click to expand...

That's awful. Did you get a written statement from the surgeon? Specifically tell the GP that you've been privately diagnosed with a degenerative cornea disease which requires long-term monitoring and care, and need to be referred to an ophthalmologist.

If calling didn't work, just book an appointment and discuss in person.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom