Have any of you considered or gone through with corrective eye surgery? (Lasik, PRK, ICL, etc.)
I have a very high glasses prescription and I am very dependent on glasses. Because of the high RX I am not a candidate for Lasik, but I can do ICL. The cost is $5300 (which I can pay for out of my HSA) and if I no longer need glasses or contacts I will get an ROI of about 20 years. I'm currently 33, so this is still before I'm likely to need cataract surgery which would replace the whole thing. (I'll still need reading glasses later, but it will be the cheap kind with no Rx instead of the expensive progressive lenses.)
If I had a small Rx or I could tolerate contacts I wouldn't bother, but I'm completely helpless without my glasses and this bothers me. It's like I'm one slap in the face from being blind. (Yes, my glasses have gone flying a few times for various reasons and it's terrifying when you have to crawl and feel around with your hands to find them.)
Some other advantages include improved safety when doing sports such as white water rafting or long distance hiking. Taking that a step further I think it may be good prep for being in a time or place that doesn't have easy access to new glasses. (Whether that is in a less developed country, a commune, or some time in the possible future.)
Since the financial side is basically a wash (or possibly positive with Lasik), I'm wondering if any other ERE people have decided to have corrective eye surgery and what were your reasons to do it or no to?
Corrective eye surgery
-
Posthumane
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:06 am
While I can't definitively comment on whether it's a good idea or not as I haven't taken the plunge yet, it's something that I've also been considering for a long time. I think as long as you keep your expectations in check (read all you can about the processes and the typical results, complications, etc.) then you probably won't be disappointed. Of all the people I know who have had it done (quite a few) all of them have been satisfied.
I have gotten some criticism from various people such as "you only have one pair of eyes, so why risk it" or "glasses aren't that expensive and your work pays part of them, so what's the point?" but over time I've noticed a correlation: the people who are most likely to criticize usually have never worn glasses, and haven't done any research about the surgery. Those people are fearful of the process because, as with all surgical procedures, there is always a chance that something can go wrong and in the early days they occasionally did.
Nowadays however, most complaints are from people who expected to have guaranteed 20/20 vision with no side effects because they weren't well informed. Not everybody can get 20/20 with the surgery, but that doesn't mean it's not worth it. My Rx is not as strong as yours by the sounds of it (I can get by without my glasses if need be) but even a small improvement would be nice.
Some other side effects include dry eyes (this one is not very well publicized by the doctors, but you can expect to have to use eye drops for up to a year in some cases), and halo/starburst effects around bright lights. The latter is usually caused by the use of old equipment with a small diameter laser on people who have large pupils. This may not be an issue for ICL though.
One thing that disappoints me is that most "vision" benefits packages through employers cover glasses/contacts but not the surgery even though in the long run it can actually save money. For example, I'm covered for up to $400 for glasses every two years, and with my Rx I could get surgery for less than $2k.
I have gotten some criticism from various people such as "you only have one pair of eyes, so why risk it" or "glasses aren't that expensive and your work pays part of them, so what's the point?" but over time I've noticed a correlation: the people who are most likely to criticize usually have never worn glasses, and haven't done any research about the surgery. Those people are fearful of the process because, as with all surgical procedures, there is always a chance that something can go wrong and in the early days they occasionally did.
Nowadays however, most complaints are from people who expected to have guaranteed 20/20 vision with no side effects because they weren't well informed. Not everybody can get 20/20 with the surgery, but that doesn't mean it's not worth it. My Rx is not as strong as yours by the sounds of it (I can get by without my glasses if need be) but even a small improvement would be nice.
Some other side effects include dry eyes (this one is not very well publicized by the doctors, but you can expect to have to use eye drops for up to a year in some cases), and halo/starburst effects around bright lights. The latter is usually caused by the use of old equipment with a small diameter laser on people who have large pupils. This may not be an issue for ICL though.
One thing that disappoints me is that most "vision" benefits packages through employers cover glasses/contacts but not the surgery even though in the long run it can actually save money. For example, I'm covered for up to $400 for glasses every two years, and with my Rx I could get surgery for less than $2k.
My eye sight has always been perfect and I consider myself blessed. But my sister had minus five or something and cilinder distorsion, and a few years ago she had lenses implanted (her cornea were too thin for lasik, as well). She is very happy with it and considers it a miracle that she can open her eyes in the morning and see things clearly immediately. She does not have any remaining refraction problems, so she does not need glasses or contact lenses.
It felt like a gamble to expose both her eyes to surgery (first one, three weeks later the other), but she would do it again now without thinking. Of course she also followed the doctor's orders strictly during the recovery period. The benefits were huge in her case. She is also a lady who likes being outdoor, outdoor sports, skiing etc, and her glasses kept her back sometimes. She also liked traveling to foreign, unhygienic countries where contact lenses could not safely be cleaned.
She is not going for ERE, but she is one frugal lady. I'm guessing by now (about five year post-surgery) she is breaking even on it.
It felt like a gamble to expose both her eyes to surgery (first one, three weeks later the other), but she would do it again now without thinking. Of course she also followed the doctor's orders strictly during the recovery period. The benefits were huge in her case. She is also a lady who likes being outdoor, outdoor sports, skiing etc, and her glasses kept her back sometimes. She also liked traveling to foreign, unhygienic countries where contact lenses could not safely be cleaned.
She is not going for ERE, but she is one frugal lady. I'm guessing by now (about five year post-surgery) she is breaking even on it.
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
Infections immediately after the surgery are the biggest problem I've heard from coworkers, though they all had their surgeries a decade ago. Half the people I've known ended up being out of commission for a month.
About 1-in-4 experience night vision difficulties and 1-in-8 have had their vision change enough that they are always wearing glasses now.
About 1-in-4 experience night vision difficulties and 1-in-8 have had their vision change enough that they are always wearing glasses now.
I had LASIK done about 6 years back. I was practically blind then -- could not see the E on the top of the chart. My vision improved to about 20/30 so I don't need glasses anymore and am happy with that. And I don't bug my wife anymore not being able to see the clock next to the bed and asking her for the time.
I had an odd condition -- my corneas tend to wrinkle -- that made it take longer to heal.
My sister and brother had it, too. I think we'd all do it again, but we were all next to blind to begin with anyway.
However, I wish they had the updated technology -- back when I had it, they still had to use a blade to open the eye. Now they do the whole thing with lasers. The people I know who have had it in the past couple years have sailed through.
I had an odd condition -- my corneas tend to wrinkle -- that made it take longer to heal.
My sister and brother had it, too. I think we'd all do it again, but we were all next to blind to begin with anyway.
However, I wish they had the updated technology -- back when I had it, they still had to use a blade to open the eye. Now they do the whole thing with lasers. The people I know who have had it in the past couple years have sailed through.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
I've been considering it for some time in terms of pure ROI, but I've been held back by the fact that each pair of glasses tends to last me for several years, so it's not exactly a major expense, and I've pretty much adapted to wearing them. However, I hadn't even considered your point about potentially finding yourself in a glasses-less situation like undeveloped countries or TEOTWAWKI.
Here's a question for those who have had this done: How long does it take to break the habit of adjusting your glasses?
I tried contacts for a year a while back, and I noticed that even though I hadn't worn glasses for months I would still touch my finger to the bridge of my nose (to push the glasses back up) all the time.
I tried contacts for a year a while back, and I noticed that even though I hadn't worn glasses for months I would still touch my finger to the bridge of my nose (to push the glasses back up) all the time.
I had Lasik done in 2008. I am content with the result.
My one pet peeve was how the clinic was trying to sell me on how "INCREDIBLE" my life would be after the surgery. I disliked the hard sell because it established high expectations. I am intelligent enough to weigh the pros and cons of the process without having to deal with the used car salesman pitch.
Overall, the only side effect that I have from the process is dry eyes; otherwise, it has been a pleasure to be able to do sports and to travel without glasses.
I am quite neutral on wearing glasses versus going through the surgery. Each situation has its pros and cons.
My one pet peeve was how the clinic was trying to sell me on how "INCREDIBLE" my life would be after the surgery. I disliked the hard sell because it established high expectations. I am intelligent enough to weigh the pros and cons of the process without having to deal with the used car salesman pitch.
Overall, the only side effect that I have from the process is dry eyes; otherwise, it has been a pleasure to be able to do sports and to travel without glasses.
I am quite neutral on wearing glasses versus going through the surgery. Each situation has its pros and cons.
I have considered it, but am too young. While working I don't really mind wearing contacts/glasses. However, I want to do long-term hiking and travel and don't want to have to worry about dealing with contacts or glasses.
I have very poor vision (about 20/500, bad enough that I can't read the top of the chart).
I talked to my optometrist and came away with a few random notes (he isn't a huge fan of the procedure):
* People get more farsighted as they get older. So, if you have corrective surgery to be perfect 20/20, then your vision will degrade as you get older. If you are nearsighted and don't desire perfect clarity *now* then you can get the surgery to be just a little fuzzy and be in good shape for a while
* Essentially the surgery vaporizes part of the cornea and consequently can't be performed multiple times
* I'm paranoid enough that I would prefer to do each eye separately to reduce the risk.
I will be waiting a few more years and then will have it done a bit before retirement.
I have very poor vision (about 20/500, bad enough that I can't read the top of the chart).
I talked to my optometrist and came away with a few random notes (he isn't a huge fan of the procedure):
* People get more farsighted as they get older. So, if you have corrective surgery to be perfect 20/20, then your vision will degrade as you get older. If you are nearsighted and don't desire perfect clarity *now* then you can get the surgery to be just a little fuzzy and be in good shape for a while
* Essentially the surgery vaporizes part of the cornea and consequently can't be performed multiple times
* I'm paranoid enough that I would prefer to do each eye separately to reduce the risk.
I will be waiting a few more years and then will have it done a bit before retirement.
My wife had Lasik in 1998 or 99. Before the surgery she was practically blind without glasses. -11
She did one eye at a time as her doctor was very conservative and the procedure was relatively new. A few days after the second eye was done she measured 20/15. It was nothing short of a miracle for someone who was practically blind.
Now that we've been overseas we would have the procedure done in Thailand in a heartbeat. The TRSC center in Bangkok seems to be the place to go. They charge about $2000 - $2400 and have many good reviews on various travel blogs and forums. I've been to the doctor in Thailand and would trust them MORE than U.S. doctors
She did one eye at a time as her doctor was very conservative and the procedure was relatively new. A few days after the second eye was done she measured 20/15. It was nothing short of a miracle for someone who was practically blind.
Now that we've been overseas we would have the procedure done in Thailand in a heartbeat. The TRSC center in Bangkok seems to be the place to go. They charge about $2000 - $2400 and have many good reviews on various travel blogs and forums. I've been to the doctor in Thailand and would trust them MORE than U.S. doctors
-
Posthumane
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:06 am
@m741 - I think your optometrist might be giving out slight misinformation, or at least isn't communicating things very well.
In regards to the first point about people getting more farsighted as they get older, that's not completely accurate. When you're near sighted (myopia) your lens is curved in such a way that when your focusing muscles are relaxed, the focal point is closer than infinity. This means that parallel light rays entering the eye from a distant object will converge in front of the retina, whereas diverging light rays from a closer object will converge on the retina properly. Your focusing muscles can only bring the focal point closer, not further away, so you are basically limited to how far you can focus.
With far sightedness (hyperopia) the opposite is true, and the focal point is "beyond infinity" so that parallel light rays from a distant object would converge behind the retina. This means it takes more muscle power to focus on near objects and, if your Rx is strong enough, it takes some muscle power to focus on objects at any distance. Since you have limited muscle power, there is a limit to how close you can focus.
Now, when you get older you develop a condition called presbyopia which is also call far-sightedness by many people but isn't the same thing. What happens is that the lens gets harder as you age and can't bend as well, so the range over which you can focus gets reduced (it takes more muscle power to bring the focal point closer). Since most people's resting focal point is at infinity (or very far away), it becomes more difficult to focus on near objects but your distance vision stays the same. If a person is slightly myopic when presbyopia sets it, they don't cancel each other out (i.e. you still won't be able to focus on distant objects any better). The focal range of a myopic/presbyopic person will be closer than a person with just presbyopia so they may not need as strong a set of reading glasses, but they will be more limited in terms of distance vision. Presbyopia will affect you regardless of whether you've had eye surgery or not (with ICL being a possible exception). One type of surgery that people get when presbyopic is sort of like "bi-focals" wherein one eye is set to a closer focus than the other to give a wider focal range.
As to your second point about not being able to do the surgery more than once, that's not completely true. Many places offer follow-up corrections for up to a year after the surgery has been performed. With a lasik type operation the flap doesn't completely reattach so they can simply lift it again, make any necessary corrections, and replace it.
I would echo your point about getting one eye done at a time though. This is what I'll likely do as well, since I'd like to see the full results of one eye before I get the other one done, just in case.
In regards to the first point about people getting more farsighted as they get older, that's not completely accurate. When you're near sighted (myopia) your lens is curved in such a way that when your focusing muscles are relaxed, the focal point is closer than infinity. This means that parallel light rays entering the eye from a distant object will converge in front of the retina, whereas diverging light rays from a closer object will converge on the retina properly. Your focusing muscles can only bring the focal point closer, not further away, so you are basically limited to how far you can focus.
With far sightedness (hyperopia) the opposite is true, and the focal point is "beyond infinity" so that parallel light rays from a distant object would converge behind the retina. This means it takes more muscle power to focus on near objects and, if your Rx is strong enough, it takes some muscle power to focus on objects at any distance. Since you have limited muscle power, there is a limit to how close you can focus.
Now, when you get older you develop a condition called presbyopia which is also call far-sightedness by many people but isn't the same thing. What happens is that the lens gets harder as you age and can't bend as well, so the range over which you can focus gets reduced (it takes more muscle power to bring the focal point closer). Since most people's resting focal point is at infinity (or very far away), it becomes more difficult to focus on near objects but your distance vision stays the same. If a person is slightly myopic when presbyopia sets it, they don't cancel each other out (i.e. you still won't be able to focus on distant objects any better). The focal range of a myopic/presbyopic person will be closer than a person with just presbyopia so they may not need as strong a set of reading glasses, but they will be more limited in terms of distance vision. Presbyopia will affect you regardless of whether you've had eye surgery or not (with ICL being a possible exception). One type of surgery that people get when presbyopic is sort of like "bi-focals" wherein one eye is set to a closer focus than the other to give a wider focal range.
As to your second point about not being able to do the surgery more than once, that's not completely true. Many places offer follow-up corrections for up to a year after the surgery has been performed. With a lasik type operation the flap doesn't completely reattach so they can simply lift it again, make any necessary corrections, and replace it.
I would echo your point about getting one eye done at a time though. This is what I'll likely do as well, since I'd like to see the full results of one eye before I get the other one done, just in case.
-
Spartan_Warrior
- Posts: 1659
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am
I had worn glasses since I was four years old. I was vey nearsighted and had bad astigmatism. In 2009 I had PRK surgery, similar to lasik, but different. It takes longer to heal, but less potential for complications from the creation of a flap on the cornea. I am so grateful today to have the incredible vision I now have. I may need reading glasses at some point in the future, but that is ok with me. I researched a lot before I went ahead with the surgery, it made me a little more comfortable. But I still think I needed a valium before the surgery, and there was some intense pain for a few days after the surgery. And lots of eye drops too.
-
Posthumane
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:06 am
Nico33 - How long did it take before you were able to be back to normal life after your surgery? I think PRK is the one I would go for as well, as I fly and do lots of outdoor activities and the flap is a liability. I realize I wouldn't be able to fly for quite some time after the surgery, but I'd hate to be stuck in a dark room for weeks...
I won't do laser surgery to avoid glasses (I don't mind wearing them at all). I will, however, soon have to do it for cataracts. My wife will also need one eye done for cataracts sooner than I will.
What is not helping both of us is the fact her cousin recently went through cataract laser surgery and became blind in that eye due to the surgery. This is probably very rare in happening, yet nonetheless it did. You can be sure it makes you hum and wind your watch when a relative went blind in one eye on a procedure that is facing you, yourself, soon. Again, it could have been a "fluke" or "oneathemthings" that goes wrong. Wife now has a cousin blind in one eye from laser surgery, and that is a fact.
I am sure the benefits of corrective eye surgery far outweigh the risks.
What is not helping both of us is the fact her cousin recently went through cataract laser surgery and became blind in that eye due to the surgery. This is probably very rare in happening, yet nonetheless it did. You can be sure it makes you hum and wind your watch when a relative went blind in one eye on a procedure that is facing you, yourself, soon. Again, it could have been a "fluke" or "oneathemthings" that goes wrong. Wife now has a cousin blind in one eye from laser surgery, and that is a fact.
I am sure the benefits of corrective eye surgery far outweigh the risks.
i am nearsighted and i too am thinking about doing lasik just one eye - my worst. i have heard people say the brain will adjust and often one does not need glasses if vision in one eye is perfect. i also hear close up vision can suffer with lasik.
over many years, i can always have the other eye done to become the "best" eye if my vision changes once again.
this would (in theory) eliminate any repeat surgeries on the same eye. that sort of thing worries me...
over many years, i can always have the other eye done to become the "best" eye if my vision changes once again.
this would (in theory) eliminate any repeat surgeries on the same eye. that sort of thing worries me...
-
AnneBentham
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:15 am
Thanks for your input. I've scheduled PRK (both eyes at once) for March 29th.
I ended up choosing PRK because it has the best outcomes and does not come with the additional risks associated with cutting into the eye (such as ICL and cataract surgery do). The last time I researched PRK was in 2005 and they still had frequent night vision problems. The risk of poor night vision is only 1-3% now. It's actually more likely for night vision to improve than degrade, so I feel good about the likely outcome. The only negative of PRK over other choices is the difficult recovery. This plus the fact that there is almost a 20% chance that I will need a second surgery in one eye because of my high prescription (-10 with -2.5 astigmatism).
I ended up choosing PRK because it has the best outcomes and does not come with the additional risks associated with cutting into the eye (such as ICL and cataract surgery do). The last time I researched PRK was in 2005 and they still had frequent night vision problems. The risk of poor night vision is only 1-3% now. It's actually more likely for night vision to improve than degrade, so I feel good about the likely outcome. The only negative of PRK over other choices is the difficult recovery. This plus the fact that there is almost a 20% chance that I will need a second surgery in one eye because of my high prescription (-10 with -2.5 astigmatism).
I had PRK in 2009 because the doc said my corneal thickness was borderline for Lasik. Both eyes were -4.5 and at my last checkup a year ago I was holding steady at 20/15, better than with glasses. 
As nico33 said the healing time was slow and all the stinging drops became a chore before I was done. With my prescription I was basically blind the 1st week and spent the next few with my nose up to the computer screen working. It took a couple months before I could see decently. Driving was a little hairy there for a while too. Oddly enough my doc never mentioned the extended recovery time before the procedure.
That said I do not have any dry eye or night vision problems. During the healing stage there were some halos and a little double vision (when looking at the moon) but that went away over time. I have been fine with the one time procedure and have not needed any adjustments.
@TLV it took me a good 3-4 months to quit pushing up imaginary glasses after wearing them for 20 years.
The other funny thing is that for the first six months I found that, of all things, the most amazing thing about the surgery was that I could see in the shower.
One advantage was cost. Where I went Lasik was $4,000 and PRK was $3,000. The basic process was the same just that the one was on the surface of the eye while the other was 'under the flap'. I used my flex plan through work so my after tax cost was around $2,000.
As nico33 said the healing time was slow and all the stinging drops became a chore before I was done. With my prescription I was basically blind the 1st week and spent the next few with my nose up to the computer screen working. It took a couple months before I could see decently. Driving was a little hairy there for a while too. Oddly enough my doc never mentioned the extended recovery time before the procedure.
That said I do not have any dry eye or night vision problems. During the healing stage there were some halos and a little double vision (when looking at the moon) but that went away over time. I have been fine with the one time procedure and have not needed any adjustments.
@TLV it took me a good 3-4 months to quit pushing up imaginary glasses after wearing them for 20 years.
The other funny thing is that for the first six months I found that, of all things, the most amazing thing about the surgery was that I could see in the shower.
One advantage was cost. Where I went Lasik was $4,000 and PRK was $3,000. The basic process was the same just that the one was on the surface of the eye while the other was 'under the flap'. I used my flex plan through work so my after tax cost was around $2,000.
My eyesight was something like 20/30 & 20/40 before I had the Lasik procedure done in 1998. I went to one of the most highly regarded specialists in S. FL at that time. Total cost was something like $1500 for both eyes; nothing was covered by insurance. The whole procedure took 5 minutes and I was back to work the next day w/ unbelievably sharp & improved vision. Over time, my vision again worsened and by ten years later the Lasik improvement had completely disappeared.
Now I'm concerned about having an unsuccessful or damaging procedure, so I won't do it again.
Now I'm concerned about having an unsuccessful or damaging procedure, so I won't do it again.