Had my kerasoft fitting today.
Posted: Tue 21 Nov 2006 9:27 pm
Today was the day when I tried the Kerasoft lens, but before I could the optom who trained under Ken Pullen and Proffesor Buckley gave me a lecture about the advantages and disadvantages of Kerasoft along with the advantages and disadvantages. So it would appear that Ken and Proffessor Buckley have trained her well. She has one extra thing going for her that the metors have not and that is she is better looking than them
I did ask the optom if she was called Lynn and if she had recently moved from Norfolk as the lecture was the same as Lynn had emailed me
Joking aside, it is very sereous.
Kerasoft is thicker than a normal soft lens so far less oxgyen transfer. This means a higher chance of vascularisation and blood vessels growing towards the cornea and making grafting should it be necessary more complicated. For those already with a graft this means the risk of rejection from an otherwise excelent graft is a higher risk. The quality of vision may not be as good as that you can get from an RGP lens. The plus is that the comfort is supposed to be better.
RGP lenses are usually a compromise between visual aquety and comfort. Great comfort and grat vision rarely go together for us. Oxygen transfer is better but there is always the debate regarding the lens moving on the cornea causing scarring. RGP lenses have a far lowwer chance of causing vascularisation so better for post graft use. RGP lens can be used across a far wider range of KC severety.
So already we have pro's and con's for both.
Why am I looking at using Kerasoft when I have a healthy graft and excellent vision from an RGP lens?
The only thing I can not do is compete in motorsport because I have RGP lenses. This means I will only use the lenses every now and then so effects of a lack of oxygen to the cornea is lessend. Risk of vascularisation and potential rejection is much reduced to about the same risk level as now. Plus if I get 6/6 vsion I can re-apply for my Motor Sport Association licence.
What are my RGP lenses like now?
They are comfortable thanks to the use of Systane eye drops and the amount of watre I drink. I get 6/4 vision and my lens wear averages 12 hours per day with one day rest most weekends.
What were the Kerasoft like?
Comfortable in that I could not feel my eye lids on the edge of the lens. However the cornea felt a whole lot dryer for the 2 hours I had them in. This may have been due to the hospiat aircon which I always have problems with. I could only get 6/6 which is all I need to go racing.
So what is my inittial conclusion?
Overall I would say the comfort was no better or worse than my RGP lenses, the sensation was distinctly different so with more frequent use I am sure i would get used to it. I lost one line in visual aquety but there is a lot higher prescription to make up for the KC. Because there is a larger variety of Rose K lenses to match the cone, the power added to compensate for a lump of plastic in the eye is far less.
Initial feelings is that Kerasoft does have something to offer but not as the first line of KC treatment. I feel if RGP lenses are a problem then softperms or piggybacking is the route to try if lens comfort is a real issue. Failing that and the KC is not too sever then consider the Kerasoft.
For those who are post graft I agree completly with the optoms that the use of Kerasoft is purely for short term use by which I mean a couple of days so you can persue a certain activity.
As with all things KC it is a compromise between good vision and comfort. We should be happy if all we get vision wise is enough for the driving standard with an acceptable level of comfort. Should you get this and improved comfort or better vision should be considerd a bonus rather than a right. If you vision is such that you can get to the legal driving limit then you can do pretty much anything someone with 'normal' vision can do. I can still achieve many things with far worse vision than I used to have it is down to how well be adapt.
Regards
Gareth

I did ask the optom if she was called Lynn and if she had recently moved from Norfolk as the lecture was the same as Lynn had emailed me

Joking aside, it is very sereous.
Kerasoft is thicker than a normal soft lens so far less oxgyen transfer. This means a higher chance of vascularisation and blood vessels growing towards the cornea and making grafting should it be necessary more complicated. For those already with a graft this means the risk of rejection from an otherwise excelent graft is a higher risk. The quality of vision may not be as good as that you can get from an RGP lens. The plus is that the comfort is supposed to be better.
RGP lenses are usually a compromise between visual aquety and comfort. Great comfort and grat vision rarely go together for us. Oxygen transfer is better but there is always the debate regarding the lens moving on the cornea causing scarring. RGP lenses have a far lowwer chance of causing vascularisation so better for post graft use. RGP lens can be used across a far wider range of KC severety.
So already we have pro's and con's for both.
Why am I looking at using Kerasoft when I have a healthy graft and excellent vision from an RGP lens?
The only thing I can not do is compete in motorsport because I have RGP lenses. This means I will only use the lenses every now and then so effects of a lack of oxygen to the cornea is lessend. Risk of vascularisation and potential rejection is much reduced to about the same risk level as now. Plus if I get 6/6 vsion I can re-apply for my Motor Sport Association licence.
What are my RGP lenses like now?
They are comfortable thanks to the use of Systane eye drops and the amount of watre I drink. I get 6/4 vision and my lens wear averages 12 hours per day with one day rest most weekends.
What were the Kerasoft like?
Comfortable in that I could not feel my eye lids on the edge of the lens. However the cornea felt a whole lot dryer for the 2 hours I had them in. This may have been due to the hospiat aircon which I always have problems with. I could only get 6/6 which is all I need to go racing.
So what is my inittial conclusion?
Overall I would say the comfort was no better or worse than my RGP lenses, the sensation was distinctly different so with more frequent use I am sure i would get used to it. I lost one line in visual aquety but there is a lot higher prescription to make up for the KC. Because there is a larger variety of Rose K lenses to match the cone, the power added to compensate for a lump of plastic in the eye is far less.
Initial feelings is that Kerasoft does have something to offer but not as the first line of KC treatment. I feel if RGP lenses are a problem then softperms or piggybacking is the route to try if lens comfort is a real issue. Failing that and the KC is not too sever then consider the Kerasoft.
For those who are post graft I agree completly with the optoms that the use of Kerasoft is purely for short term use by which I mean a couple of days so you can persue a certain activity.
As with all things KC it is a compromise between good vision and comfort. We should be happy if all we get vision wise is enough for the driving standard with an acceptable level of comfort. Should you get this and improved comfort or better vision should be considerd a bonus rather than a right. If you vision is such that you can get to the legal driving limit then you can do pretty much anything someone with 'normal' vision can do. I can still achieve many things with far worse vision than I used to have it is down to how well be adapt.
Regards
Gareth