Laser Eye Surgery

Desert Orchid

Desert Orchid

Senior Jockey
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
25,036
Have any of you had laser eye surgery or know anyone who has?

Care to share your experiences?

I'm booked in for a consultaion during the week. I've heard stories good and bad about it and even Which? appear to be holding back on recommending it.
 
I know about 20 people who have had it done. Everyone bar one wholeheartedly recommends it. One - my sister - felt quite a lot of pain and though it passed after a few weeks, she is back wearing contacts again after a couple of years. No lasting damage though.
 
One of my former colleagues had it done around ten years or so ago when it was still very expensive. It cost him thousands but he says it was the best money he ever spent.
 
This is a post I made on another forum on 19th May 2007

I'd also like to warn people that it's not an open and shut thing. I had incredible eyesight right up until I started staring at a vdu 14 hours a day. My eyesight gradually deteriorated until I was forced into getting reading glasses around 10 years ago. Within a couple of years I also required glasses for my far sight. I then developed an astigmatism in my right eye. That seemed to appear overnight and, as such, I thought I had got a fag cinder in it and expected it to mend. Alas, it didn't and got progressively worse to the extent that I couldn't see peoples faces at the other end of the room.

Last June I went to Optimax in Glasgow to have Epi-Lasek done. The reason I went for the cheaper option was because most of the horror stories I read on the internet seemed to be associated with the costlier procedure (Lasik) where they cut a flap in your eye. I'd read claims that, even if the surgery went OK, the flap never truly heals and a blow to the eye could leave it severely damaged. In fact they won't do the Lasik procedure on anyone who's into contact sports. While I'm not into said sports, there's no shortage of loons up here who don't exactly give you a choice in the matter. Anyway, that's why I went for Epi-Lasek despite the fact that it was said to be a lot more painful and had a much longer recovery time. I thought I'd go for the pain now rather than forever worrying about some scum bag taking a pot shot at me. The procedure itself wasn't painful (although the smell of your eye burning would freak a lot of people out) but, I have to say it was fecking murder once the anaesthetic wore off. It felt like my eyes were jam packed with cigarette burns. The receptionist had given me more anaesthetic to put in them but told me its' use slowed down the healing process so, bacause of that, I didn't use them. For about 6 hours after I got home all I did was pace up and down the floor, my eyes streaming, until I got so tired I fell into a half sleep. The pain gradually subsided but, even a day later, it still felt as though they were packed with dirt and glass. After 3 days, they removed the protective lenses they cover your eyes with (I think they only do this for Epi-Lasek) and they felt a hell of a lot better. They had told me that, because of my age, I would still likely require reading glasses and that it would be my far sight they would be restoring. I was chuffed to find I could read a newspaper as well as the VDU that day (although my far sight was still a bit blurred) and it was great standing in the pub that day and being able to read how long there was still to go in the football match on the tv in the far corner.

Over the next week or so my eyes were disappointingly up and down. They told me that was not atypical. After a few weeks I found I couldn't stare at the vdu all day without getting sore eyes / head and succumbed to the specs. Things got slowly progressively worse as the weeks went by. No longer could I read a newspaper without either screwing my eyes or donning the glasses. I would regularly wake up with my eye lids suctioned to my eyes due to dryness. The only positive was my long sight improved (although even that fell short of expectations borne out of once having perfect eyesight).

One year on the situation is as follows. I am now long sighted to the extent that I've to go back next week to see if they are going to give me a free top up procedure. My eyesight is very dependant on light conditions. On a sunny day it's fine. I could maybe even read a newspaper with my eyes screwed up but, not for more than a few seconds due to the discomfort. Watching the television for prolonged periods makes my eyes so tired and sore that I often can't wait to get to my bed. I have little confidence driving at night unless I'm very familiar with the route, what's more I'm not even sure that glasses would improve this. There's also a depth problem in bad light. I've went over a few road humps without noticing them in poor light. It's often difficult to determine a road marking from a raised pavement. The dryness isn't as bad as it was but persists (probably my smoking doesn't help). As Spock would say to Kirk "It's sight Jim but not as we know it".

Optimax say my eyes have "regressed" although I've had no real explanation as to why. I've now lost all faith in the procedure and, while I'll probably go ahead with top up surgery, the thought of another year of this sh1t doesn't appeal at all. They can't keep whittling your eye away till they get it right (assuming it's possible for them to get it right). Will I be copying and pasting the same post next year? To anyone considering the procedure, I wouldn't want to put you off as, judging from what I've read elsewhere, I'm one of the unlucky ones but, I think you should at least know what might, but hopefully won't, lie ahead. Maybe my choice of Epi-Lasek wasn't a good one. There again maybe I could be worse off.
 
And a follow up post on 23rd May 2008

I had top-up laser surgery last November but I've been hanging back on adding to the posts about my original surgery because my eyes haven't fully settled down (last time that took 15 months). For the top-up they asked if I'd be willing to travel to Hull as one of their top surgeons operated from there and he did some additional treatment for haze which I had suffered badly from on the first treatment. I agreed and got a friend to drive me down on the day of the surgery.

I found out some more about laser surgery. As I said in my post about my first op, I chose to have the more uncomfortable (with longer healing time) epi-lasek rather than lasik as I was determined to avoid having the flap cut in my eye which is required for the latter (it's been said on the internet that this never truly heals and they won't give it to e.g. anyone involved in contact sports). The Hull surgeon told me that epi-lasek was a lot more susceptible to 'regression' (their word) which means your eyes try to return to their pre-op prescription. Actually it's the eyes healing (trying to bounce back to the shape they were before being attacked) even though that's not what you want. Apparently it's easier for them to fool the eye into thinking it's not been attacked with the lasik treatment. He tried to talk me into having the lasik but, after hearing how much I was against the flap, agreed to to epi-lasek. He said that this time they'd overcorrect the eyes in the hope that they'd regress to a prescription of zero.

Remembering the pain I had with the first surgery I wasn't looking forward to the journey back to Glasgow and the surgeon told me to expect severe pain on the way home (when they're selling you the surgery it's described as 'some discomfort' but on the literature they give you after the surgery it's changed to 'exruciating pain warning - do not attend A&E' (this is for epi-lasek by the way). After the surgery I made my way back to the car and awaited the pain but, this time, it never materialised. In fact, by the time I got home around 5 hours later my eyes even felt comfortable enough to watch tv. This was in total contrast to my first op and, from what I've been told by optimax since, was not the norm. In keeping with what the surgeon told me about overcorrecting my eyes, I was pretty short sighted. I could read the smallest of print on medicine bottles but had to sit within 3 feet of the tv to see it. The following day my eyes felt OK but the next day (Sunday) one eye was quite sore and was streaming.

On the Moday I went down to the Glasgow clinic to have the protective lenses removed. I was looking forward to this as last time the optician just scooped them out with his finger and my eyes felt fine after that. This time however they administered an anaesthetic and took them out with tweasers which puzzled me. I was told the eyes were still healing and to return in a few days time to have them checked. By the time I got home the anaesthetic had worn off and I was in fucking agony. It felt as thoiugh skin had been pulled away with the lenses and, every time I blinked, it was murder. I took a couple of the sleeping pills they supply and went to bed where, thankfully, I slept for about 5 or 6 hours. By the time I woke up it felt as if the wounds had scabbed over and the pain wasn't anything like as bad.

Over the coming months my long sight gradually got better as my near sight deteriorated. It was probably around 6 weeks before I would have been able to pass the driving eye test. Up until a couple of months ago I could read a newspaper and my laptop no problem but then some of the problems I experienced first time round resurfaced. I had a lot of problems with haze and became a lot more reliant on light and, on a few occassions my eyesight was so blurred I had to resort to the reading glasses. It's now six months since the top-up op and my eyesight is still a bit up and down. Today I'm havng no difficulty with the laptop but I can only read the paper if I stand directly under the light bulb. My long sight's fine. I can read number plates way beyond the driving test distance (in good light at least) although I must say I can't make faces out at a distance anything like I could before my eyesight went. I'm still getting the haze (although not as bad as a few weeks back), my eyes are a bit dry and I'm sometimes experiencing halo effect round objects. I'm hopeful all of that will disappear in time but, given the regression I had first time round, I'm still not sure what I'm going to end up with in terms of eyesight. The few days I had recently whe I had to resort to glasses have dented my confidence a bit although, right at this moment, they're not bad. If my first op is anything to go by, it will be another 9 month before they've fully settled and I'll know what I've ended up with (although that's not to say they can't deteriorate after that).

The stage I'm at I'm glad I had it done but would I do it again? Would I fook. When I went for the first surgery I thought a few days of discomfort and that's it, but here I am, 21 monrhs on. I don't know how typical I am as anyone else I know had the lasik and I think the results are a lot more immediate and consistent with that. If you don't mind the risks associated with the flap then that would seem the way to go. Me, I wouldn't fancy having to worry about some looney sticking a finger in my eye the rest of my life. If I was back at the start I'd definitely go for the nocturnal lenses (which I only found out about recently). When I was wearing glasses I could get the optician to give me a 'mid-prescription' (i.e. good enough for driving and good enough for me to see the laptop and just about read a paper). You can't get that with laser surgery as they can't operate to accomodate every small change. I presume they could give you a mid-prescription with the nocturnal lenses though.

PS When you read up on laser surgery on the internet, one piece of advice you're often given is to make sure you get an experienced surgeon. How in the hell are you supposed to do that though? If you're thinkng of having it done and you stay near the Hull Optimax, ask for Dr. Fink. I was told by the Glasgow Optimax that he was a top surgeon, he cetainly seemed to know what he was about (so far so good in my case) and I presume they didn't send me all that way for nothing.
 
And today.

It's now over a year and a half since the top up surgery. I'm still having problems with haze, dryness (lids are often glued to eyes when I wake up) and it's as if they still haven't settled. Every now and again (today included) I have to resort to the glasses for the laptop then, a few days later (hopefully this time as well), it's as if my brain starts processing the signal differently and I can read small print on the laptop again. I've got one eye that's short sighted and one that's long sighted. Close up stuff is very dependent on light (I'm fine reading a paper on a sunny day but it's sore on a dull day or in unnatural light). I don't have the problems driving at night that I had with the original surgery.

Am I glad I had it done? Yes, but I would never have done it if I knew that was what I had to go through. I think I'd give nocturnal lenses (not suitable for big prescriptions) a go first. You just put them in at night (every night for so long then just every second night) and you can see OK during the day with them out.

http://nocturnallens.com/
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the items, Tom.

I'm booked into the Ultralase clinic in Glasgow. I'll see what they have to say. The optician I spoke to the other day during my routine eye test said she didn't think they'd deem me suitable (I have an astigatism in my left eye which I've had all my life I think) and I'm short-sighted in my right eye but I also need glasses for reading. She thought they might be able to do something for my right eye but only for the shortsightedness and I'd still need reading glasses.

I'll let you know how it goes but I would probably have to put off an operation for a year unless they can do me very soon. Because of the 75-mile drive to work I wouldn't want to end up having to take days off for my eyes to adjust/heal.
 
DO - had treatment with Ultralase in 2005. Vision much better than pre-op but still need glasses to drive. Thinking about top up surgery but haven't fully decided yet. Procedure itself wasn't painful although I was in a lot of pain when the anaesthetic wore off. However, this was sorted fairly easily with maximum dosage of paracetamol and ibuprofen and had passed by the time I woke up the following morning. If you'd like any more info feel free to ask away :)
 
I still find it hard to believe that paracetamol and/or ibuprofen works for people, especially when it comes to severe pain. It doesn't touch pain for me, I may as well not take either. I'm pretty sure I have a tiny pain threshold though - when having teeth out at the age of about 13 I needed 3-4 times the anaesthetic they'd usually give. It would probably also explain why I was in so much agony when having an MRI having had an arthroscopy to fill a joint with dye - it was horrific, despite the anaesthetic. I'm on hefty painkillers at the moment - and have been for 2 years - but I am still in constant pain. My mother is the same.
 
Last edited:
Did I ever tell you about the time the surgeon didn't anaesthetise me enough for an op?

I was having ingrowing toenails removed under local anaesthetic. Seeing my leg quivering as he worked on the first toe, the surgeon said, "Relax, Mr O, you've no need to be nervous."

I replied, "I'm not nervous, I'm in pain!"

"OK, so what am I doing now?"

"You're jabbing the sole of my foot with something sharp... now you're running the pointed end up and down the sole of my foot."

"OK, we'd better give you more anaesthetic..."
 
Where did that happen to you DO ? The same thing happened to me at Hairmyres Hospital.

He gave me an anaesthetic and couldn't be bothered waiting until it took effect. He jabbed my foot and asked "Can you feel this". I replied "Yes". He then proceeded to continue taking the nail off, I felt like strangling him.
 
Both of my parents have had laser surgery and neither need glasses a couple of years on. Both would fully recommend it.
 
bigeeps said:
Where did that happen to you DO ? The same thing happened to me at Hairmyres Hospital.

He gave me an anaesthetic and couldn't be bothered waiting until it took effect. He jabbed my foot and asked "Can you feel this". I replied "Yes". He then proceeded to continue taking the nail off, I felt like strangling him.
Click to expand...

Hairmyres Hospital!

(Before the re-build.)
 
I'm disappointed to see that the longish-term after-effects of laser eye surgery aren't much better than my own experience, which was a helluva long time ago - must've been in the early 1990s. I have a lazy left eye and that wasn't operated on - the 'good' right eye was. The idea was to correct very blurred distance vision (I could see micro-print perfectly well). I had no probs with the surgery, nothing more than a slight feeling of tightness or grittiness in the eye for a day or two, and everything was so sharply-defined I felt as if I'd been given brand-new eyes.

All well for a year or two, then I began to find that I could no longer see small print, until up to now, when I can't read a bluddy thing without specs! So, for the cost and the longevity of it - no, I wouldn't bother again. It was when I began night-driving that I realised it had left me with a really bad problem with dazzle, too - something I'd never had before. Overall, initially delighted to see middle and distant objects clearly. Longer term - rubbish! Had it done at a private London clinic.
 
krizon said:
I'm disappointed to see that the longish-term after-effects of laser eye surgery aren't much better than my own experience, which was a helluva long time ago - must've been in the early 1990s. I have a lazy left eye and that wasn't operated on - the 'good' right eye was. The idea was to correct very blurred distance vision (I could see micro-print perfectly well). I had no probs with the surgery, nothing more than a slight feeling of tightness or grittiness in the eye for a day or two, and everything was so sharply-defined I felt as if I'd been given brand-new eyes.

All well for a year or two, then I began to find that I could no longer see small print, until up to now, when I can't read a bluddy thing without specs! So, for the cost and the longevity of it - no, I wouldn't bother again. It was when I began night-driving that I realised it had left me with a really bad problem with dazzle, too - something I'd never had before. Overall, initially delighted to see middle and distant objects clearly. Longer term - rubbish! Had it done at a private London clinic.
Click to expand...

My cousin knows a few people who've needed top up treatments within 4 or 5 years. That's why I think nocturnal lenses would be a good alternative as they can just change the prescription whereas they can't keep shaving 20% off your eye. Young people should also consider the fact that some stem cell treatment could be available in the future. Hopefully that would still work on laser damaged eyes but I'd check first.
 
I wouldnt have it done - Ive only looked into it a little,cos my contacts and glasses combo (have the odd day off from contacts here and there) works well for me.

Its just not been around long enough and had enough of a success rate (though IM well aware that you only really hear the bad stories) for me to want to give it a go - ive only got two eyes, and right now im fine with how im managing things!!

I have to have Ibuprophen and paracetamols 3 and 4 (respectively) at a time to get any effect SL - though Ive got a really high pain threshold, that could have something to do with it - if I say i want some,people start to worry... so you arent the only one - i find them slightly useless too !!
 
I had it done almost 2 years ago and I would recommend it to anyone.I was badly shortsighted before and had worn glasses almost 24 hours a day for 10 years and contacts for riding out.Havent had a single problem since and wouldn't hesitate to do it again if I had to.No pain during op,just little discomfort, and same afterwards.Within 24 hours I was driving without glasses.
 
HT: wot are them nocturnal lenses things, then? Thing is, I'm blind as a mole without the specs on nowadays, anyway - can't read anything, and while I can see there are tiles on the roofs of the houses outside, they look very faintly-defined without the glasses. Put the gogs on, and zip! every tile's sharply defined. So disappointing, 'cos what was and is promised - a life without specs - sure isn't the case. Spoons - yes, a couple of years and a bit was fine for me, but after five years, I needed specs again. As Honest Tom says, you may end up needing a top-up in a few years' time.
 
krizon said:
HT: wot are them nocturnal lenses things, then? Thing is, I'm blind as a mole without the specs on nowadays, anyway - can't read anything, and while I can see there are tiles on the roofs of the houses outside, they look very faintly-defined without the glasses. Put the gogs on, and zip! every tile's sharply defined. So disappointing, 'cos what was and is promised - a life without specs - sure isn't the case. Spoons - yes, a couple of years and a bit was fine for me, but after five years, I needed specs again. As Honest Tom says, you may end up needing a top-up in a few years' time.
Click to expand...

Kri, during the night the nocturnal lenses painlessly apply slight pressure to certain points of the eyes (these are the points the laser surgery would be burning away) to shape your eye. When removed you see just as if you had the lenses in but your eyes gradually ease back to their normal shape. At first you get maybe 18 straight hrs of good vision but after a while (months not years) you'll only need to wear them every second night. Apparently the ancient Chinese used to place sand bags on the eyes of myopic people overnight for the same effect. I don't think it's suitable for heavy prescriptions though.
 
DO, I had the optimax treatment HT had, around 18 years or more ago now. It was a relatively new procedure at the time, and I can honestly say I would do it again in a heartbeat. My eyesight is virtually the same as it was post surgery, with one eye -.25 short and the other spot on.
 
Shadow Leader said:
I still find it hard to believe that paracetamol and/or ibuprofen works for people, especially when it comes to severe pain. It doesn't touch pain for me, I may as well not take either. I'm pretty sure I have a tiny pain threshold though - when having teeth out at the age of about 13 I needed 3-4 times the anaesthetic they'd usually give. It would probably also explain why I was in so much agony when having an MRI having had an arthroscopy to fill a joint with dye - it was horrific, despite the anaesthetic. I'm on hefty painkillers at the moment - and have been for 2 years - but I am still in constant pain. My mother is the same.
Click to expand...

Could be something genetic and I certainly believe that pain thresholds vary from person to person. Obviously I don't know much about the kind of pain you're in but different some pain killers work more effectively on different types of pain e.g. nerve pain, muscle pain etc so I'd suggest you have your meds reviewed. That said, if you've been on strong pain killers for some time the body does have a habit of getting used to them thereby you require more to get the same effect which might explain why you find the weak painkillers so ineffective. Touch would I rarely have to take pain relief so they still seem to work for me.

Going back to the eye surgery, I had the flap then zap one - can't remember the technical term! - and my prescription was quite strong before I had it done. In all fairness I was warned beforehand that due to having a strong prescription I might have to have the procedure redone at some point in the future. Like Spoons I was able to drive after 24 hours but I know my eyesight has worsened since then. In all honesty, if I knew that having it done a second time would fix things until I'm at the age where I'm likely to need reading glasses anyway I'd have it done but the thought of it still not being right does put me off a bit.
 
Back
Top