Has anyone had or know of anyone that has had the Implantable Contact Lenses procedur

[nyg052003]

I think its called Intek, or Intak eye surgery but when i googled it I couldnt really find much info so im just asking around the different forums to see who might have had it done or known of anyone who has. I was able to find info under the "Implantable Contact Lenses " when I googled it though but I would like to actually talk to someone or people who has had it done before. I wear rigid contact lenses for my eye situation, Karacter konus if im spelling it right and I have to wear the rigid ones to correct my vision. The surgery would place the contacts permanently in the eyes so there will be no more need or hassle of taking them in or out.

[glennb1]

What happens as you get older and your eye prescription changes ?

Cut out the old ones, put in some new ones ?

[nyg052003]

Originally Posted by glennb1

What happens as you get older and your eye prescription changes ?

Cut out the old ones, put in some new ones ?

Thats what all I am trying to find out. I do know from talking to this one girl that the contacts can easlily come out just as they implanted them though some would say no to the digging in and going in and out of thier eyes but for those who have to wear them I mean what else are you gona do. And yeah some peoples eyes dont drastically change that much whereas others do so I guess thats an individual based situation. Again thats something people with this eye problem will have to weigh on rather as they get older too rather they want to continue to have to put in the lens every day and take them out so forth.

[jkkyler]

The devices are called Intacs and they are different from implantable contact lenses - Intacs are corneal stromal implants designed to stabilize keratoconus. What you wont probably hear is that they are a failed refractive surgery technology that had a shitload of money poured into it and they are not willing to give up on it yet. Every few years it comes back with a 'new indication for surgery'. Initially when it came out doctors were charged $50,000 just for training costs (+equipment costs) and a lot more money was pumped in afterwards. Lasik, PRK, and clear lens extraction and others are much better choices and put them nearly out of business so they essentially found new reasons for use. At the first private practice that I worked at I helped put 7 in and 5 people had them removed within a year. Intacs are tiny little tubes that are imbedded in your cornea for re-shaping - essentially what your RGP lenses do. My professional advice is stay away there are still a bunch of problems with them (glare,Halos, fluctuating vision etc.). Implantable contact lenses (also known as phakic IOLs) are the Verisyse & Visian lenses and they would not benefit you nor would lasik, prk, ltk, or many of the other refractive surgery technologies. The only surgery I would reccomend and that most ophthalmologists would concur with is Corneal transplant (full thickness- not DSAEK). For now my professional advice is stick with RGP contacts. Intacs corneal implants are approved by the FDA for keratoconus under a Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE).

Humanitarian Device: Authorized by U.S. Federal law for use in the treatment of nearsightedness and astigmatism associated with keratoconus. The effectiveness of this device for this use has not been demonstrated.

PS - I am an eye care professional with 20 yrs in the field most notably Laser vision correction - certified to run, calibrate, and service most excimer lasers on the market today as well as having written software to establish surgery & safety profile for refractive software. I also have been involved with a number of experimental research endeavors into vision correction both here (US) and abroad.

[OlderNDirt]

Take jkkyker's information to heart!

I had an epi (epicharatrafacia (sp) or donor cornea transplant) done to one eye about 25 years ago to correct severe myopia by one of the leading experts in the world at that time. It worked great for about 2 - 3 months (did not need glasses at all), but then started to lose the vision. While it may be better now then before the surgery, I now need considerable correction and contacts are no longer an option. On top of that, other eye doctors seem very reluctant to do anything more then an eye test for corrective lenses (new glass perscription). Even though I was told the procedure was reversable, even this "specialist" was unwilling to remove it since my vision is, at least somewhat better then before the surgery.

He did a radial karatotomy (sp) on the other eye which turned out far superior to the epi, but I still need corrective lens for that eye as well, so all this did not eliminate the need for glasses which I need to wear at all times and correction still does not achieve anywhere near 20/20 vision.

If I new then what I know now, I would not have had anything done, at least not at that time. The limited improvement in sight barely offsets the added disadvantages of limited night vision, occasional bluriness and focusing problems, and haloing or whatever it is called. When it comes down to it, is putting in contacts daily really that bad?

[glennb1]

Originally Posted by OlderNDirt

When it comes down to it, is putting in contacts daily really that bad?

I'm sorry to hear about the troubles you had.

I wear contacts now. It's a bifocal contact lens. I put it in every morning, take it out at night. So far so good. If I eventually get dry eyes as I get older and can't wear contact lenses any more I'll consider lasik or something similar. I won't let anyone do surgery to insert something into my eye.

I really hate glasses. I don't even have a bifocal pair. If I have to I can wear my glasses with the perscription for bringing far away things into focus and look over or under the glasses for upclose stuff.

[jkkyler]

GLENNb1
Please be very aware that LASIK is indeed surgery and in many cases it is the wrong option. Cataract surgery which millions of people undergo routinely each year involves 'inserting something in my eye'- specifically an implantable iol (intraocular lens)- In many cases this is a much better option than a surface ablation such as LASIK, LASEK, or PRK. Many of the newer iol's allow you to see both up close and in the distance - something LASIK can not do. With LASIK you either get corrected for distance or near but not both simultaneously once you become presbyopic around 40-45 yrs you will still need glasses to read if corrected for distance- My advice if and when you need it, consult with a knowledgeable ophthalmologist who has significant experience in refractive surgery who will give you pluses and minuses on existing technologies because there are many out there (PC IOL's, Phakic IOL's, LASIK, LASEK, PRK, LTK, Intacs, and various subsets of each) and each has its indications and contraindications- everybody thinks LASIK because that is the familiar 'hot button' term but it is not always the best choice.

[glennb1]

JKKYLER
I just used LASIK as an example. I know it's surgery. I didn't think they just waved a magic wand over my eyes. If and when I'd go see a professional about it. I'm not just gonna call 1800-CHEAP-LASIK and ask - When can ya do me !?
I know LASIK can fix near or far but not both. For some people having the surgery means correcting their distance vision and throwing away their glasses with the thick lenses and only having a pair of glasses with thin lenses to use for close up viewing. Pretty much everyone I know that's had it done has been happy with it.

Just wondering....
What proof do you have that LASIK is the wrong option in many cases ?

[jkkyler]

Don't get me wrong- LASIK is a great procedure but it is just one of many and has it's limitations. In the case of somebody with epithelial basement membrane dystrophy (quite common in fact) PRK is a much better choice since it achieves the same result and remedies the issue. For a truck driver who does extensive night driving LASIK can be crippling secondary to Halos and glare issues that surface with night driving not to mention a loss in contrast sensitivity. For prople like these a Crystalens or Rezoom amy be a better option. The list goes on and on.

I am not saying that LASIK is a bad procedure, quite the opposite - It is a great option but isn't the magic bullet for everyone. Nearly 100% of people walk through the doors at my clinic insisting that LASIK is right for them when in about 15%-20% (my casual observation/estimate) end up deciding on a different option once all the facts/ options are presented to them.

Many people. especially nearsighted people in the -2.00D to -3.00d who don't wear glasses to read fail to realize that after LASIK they will need reading glasses because that is going to change. Also depending on the corneal thickness LASIK may not be a good option secondary to the need to leave a 250 micron residual stromal bed - many people do not have this residual tissue level but by doing PRK which gives the same result with the same laser we can lessen tissue removal by ~140-160 microns which is very significant amount but the effect is not instantaneous as it is with Lasik it takes several days for the eye to re-epithelialize during which a bandage contact lens is typically worn. I could go on and on but once again my point wasn't that LASIK isn't bad but just one of many options available and for a significant number of people not the best. Nearly every day I hear 'I am glad I spoke with you guys because I had no idea about 'xxxx'

PS a significant source of my income has come from LASIK and I have assisted in thousands since 1998 so please don't think I am bashing it. Also believe it or not I still have many people who don't think they had 'surgery' after Lasik - heck many who have their eye cut open and cataract taken out and an IOL put in don't think they had 'surgery' -"oh I thought they used a laser not surgery"??? very scary actually but I am not lumping you in with them.

[nyg052003]

Originally Posted by jkkyler

The devices are called Intacs and they are different from implantable contact lenses - Intacs are corneal stromal implants designed to stabilize keratoconus. What you wont probably hear is that they are a failed refractive surgery technology that had a shitload of money poured into it and they are not willing to give up on it yet. Every few years it comes back with a 'new indication for surgery'. Initially when it came out doctors were charged $50,000 just for training costs (+equipment costs) and a lot more money was pumped in afterwards. Lasik, PRK, and clear lens extraction and others are much better choices and put them nearly out of business so they essentially found new reasons for use. At the first private practice that I worked at I helped put 7 in and 5 people had them removed within a year. Intacs are tiny little tubes that are imbedded in your cornea for re-shaping - essentially what your RGP lenses do. My professional advice is stay away there are still a bunch of problems with them (glare,Halos, fluctuating vision etc.). Implantable contact lenses (also known as phakic IOLs) are the Verisyse & Visian lenses and they would not benefit you nor would lasik, prk, ltk, or many of the other refractive surgery technologies. The only surgery I would reccomend and that most ophthalmologists would concur with is Corneal transplant (full thickness- not DSAEK). For now my professional advice is stick with RGP contacts. Intacs corneal implants are approved by the FDA for keratoconus under a Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE).

Humanitarian Device: Authorized by U.S. Federal law for use in the treatment of nearsightedness and astigmatism associated with keratoconus. The effectiveness of this device for this use has not been demonstrated.

PS - I am an eye care professional with 20 yrs in the field most notably Laser vision correction - certified to run, calibrate, and service most excimer lasers on the market today as well as having written software to establish surgery & safety profile for refractive software. I also have been involved with a number of experimental research endeavors into vision correction both here (US) and abroad.

thanx for your input and i will consider it all and now i doubt for real i will try and get the surgery and moreso because the female that I am friends with had it done and she didnt think it helped her at all. She went to a doctor that was very very experienced and she did one eye first and said after her experience with it she wont do the other eye. The main problem I am having is that my eye doctor couldnt seem to find a contact that would not stop lifting off my left eye and i definitely need to get one to fit good.

[gabrieljosh]

im itching my eyes right now just reading this kind of procedures...

[daleb]

The simple answer, you go in there and have the lenses replaced for 20/20 vision.
Is it a smart decision? Probably only for those older folks getting cataracts, or those with serious vision problems. Vanity being the worst reason to risk surgery.
What if you are younger and your eyesight will change with age? Then you wear glasses or contacts to make the needed correction.

As the post above, things are not always straight forward. But for the majority of people these procedures have become routine.

[jkkyler]

Originally Posted by daleb

The simple answer, you go in there and have the lenses replaced for 20/20 vision.
Is it a smart decision? Probably only for those older folks getting cataracts, or those with serious vision problems.

I do not really agree with that statement replacing the lens(es) in the eye(s) does nothing to fix corneal issues. A toric IOL can address simple astigmatism issues but that is it. For many people there is a vocational aspect - Firefighters and policeman can be compromised in a gas mask or smoky environment and cs spray under a contact can be horrible. For these people refractive surgery is often a vocational neccessity - serious eye problem or not. Also as catarct surgery, followed closely by LASIK, is the most performed surgery in the world with a very low complication rate many people choose to have it done while they are young and healthy and reap the functional and cosmetic benefits rather than chance the inability due to poor health later. Once cat surg/ lens replacement (also known as clear lens extraction) is done there is no need for cat surgery later in life. I have never had an elective procedure done in my life but when I become presbyopic and need bifocals it may interfere with my job and make things much more difficult and I am likely to have a cryatalens or Rezoom implant done then.

[daleb]

jkkyler, I defer to you for more first-hand knowledge on the subject. My only point is any surgery for cosmetic reasons needs to be assessed very carefully.

Obviously, if there are also other issues, like the limitation of wearing contacts or eyeglasses on the job, that is another consideration that also has to be considered.

Those requiring surgery to correct problems other than vision correction may also benefit in having their vision corrected at that time if it is medically advisable.

[nyg052003]

Originally Posted by jkkyler

The devices are called Intacs and they are different from implantable contact lenses - Intacs are corneal stromal implants designed to stabilize keratoconus. What you wont probably hear is that they are a failed refractive surgery technology that had a shitload of money poured into it and they are not willing to give up on it yet. Every few years it comes back with a 'new indication for surgery'. Initially when it came out doctors were charged $50,000 just for training costs (+equipment costs) and a lot more money was pumped in afterwards. Lasik, PRK, and clear lens extraction and others are much better choices and put them nearly out of business so they essentially found new reasons for use. At the first private practice that I worked at I helped put 7 in and 5 people had them removed within a year. Intacs are tiny little tubes that are imbedded in your cornea for re-shaping - essentially what your RGP lenses do. My professional advice is stay away there are still a bunch of problems with them (glare,Halos, fluctuating vision etc.). Implantable contact lenses (also known as phakic IOLs) are the Verisyse & Visian lenses and they would not benefit you nor would lasik, prk, ltk, or many of the other refractive surgery technologies. The only surgery I would reccomend and that most ophthalmologists would concur with is Corneal transplant (full thickness- not DSAEK). For now my professional advice is stick with RGP contacts. Intacs corneal implants are approved by the FDA for keratoconus under a Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE).

Humanitarian Device: Authorized by U.S. Federal law for use in the treatment of nearsightedness and astigmatism associated with keratoconus. The effectiveness of this device for this use has not been demonstrated.

PS - I am an eye care professional with 20 yrs in the field most notably Laser vision correction - certified to run, calibrate, and service most excimer lasers on the market today as well as having written software to establish surgery & safety profile for refractive software. I also have been involved with a number of experimental research endeavors into vision correction both here (US) and abroad.

are you saying that a corneal transplant would be like a very very high and successful risk chance in which the percentages are very very high that the outcome would be effective??

Also whats all involved? Like will they use like someones eyes who like is on thier dying bed or something when they die or what?