Drivng Vision Poll

[K Man]

Have you acheived driving vision after a graft (with or without correction)?

The surgical statisics suggest a 90%+ success rate, but that is a survival rate for a graft of 2 years or more, NOT a degree of quality of vision.

As surgeons are unable to give any indication as to the visual outcome of surgery, I thought a poll might help anyone considering a graft.

[GarethB]

I have put without corrected vision as three years post graft I could.

Still can, but need correction, just fail uncorrected in the left eye.

Medical definition of a succesful graft is basically clear cornea and no signs of rejection. Anything else is a bonus, unfortunatly quality of vision does not seem to matter

The stats I have seen suggest a higher succes rate and post 10 years 90% success rate. My grafts were doen in 89 and 90.

[K Man]

Thanks Gareth.

Overwhelming response!!!

Anyone else had a graft out there? No post required, just click to vote.

[jayuk]

K Man

You sound very similar to another poster who used to post here...who shared the same concerns

However, I think your question needs re-adjustment. The figure you have refered to is for the success rate of a graft...and thats it....however as many are now understanding, this "success" is based on a consultants interpretation. A Patients interpretation of the graft is very different. You may want to search this forum as there have been very many posts on this subject before which I am sure will aid you in answering some of your questions.

I think its understood that those that do go through a graft cannot determine what level of vision they will attain. As its a very long journey to recovery; and each eye is unique; it would be highly unfair for us to expect a consultant to give us an indication.

Majority of consultants do say that the patient should expect a 12 - 18 month recovery journey; in fact I have not come across anyone who was told otherwise.

In order to understand and potentially help yourself to address your question; it may prove useful to understand the delicate nature of corneal tissue and re-attachment; and its effects on steady visual acuity outcome.

VA post graft without correction is extremely rare; and many do still need corneal lenses / glasses. However; in majority of cases it is easier to fit a cornea with mild/moderate astigmatism than it is with moderate-advanced keratconus.

As far as this question being "NUMBER ONE", I would beg to differ; there are many questions that in my opinion are "NUMBER ONE" that need addressing with grafts......that are all equally important - and one that is in the Champions League of the "Number One" slot is "How well will my life be post graft when compared to pre graft!"

J

[GarethB]

K Man,

I honestly do not think quality of vision is measured/recorded so the stats just aren't there.


The medical definition of a succesful grfat is that it is cleare and healthy. No signs of rejection and such like. So based on that they can give the stats.

To us the patient a succes means we can see with or without some kind of sight correction. Many cope perfectly well with having rejection episodes.

[Andrew MacLean]

K Man

I'm like Gareth. I now have driving vision (with specs) in the eye I had grafted.

My other eye is due for a graft this year.

Andrew

[GarethB]

What was raised at the AGM by Mr Tuft the guest speaker, all normal healthy corneas vary slightly in shape, so no two are alike.

Therefore a disc of slightly differing shape to our own (even if it were norma) is being sewn in. Due to the differneces and the imposibility of getting even tension on the sutures all round means slight residual astigmatism is inevitable.

This is why visual aquity will never be guaranteed. It just makes fitting lenses or glasses easier.

[K Man]

I accept an individual outcome can not/should not be given for vision, but a general statistic could be given.

The results must be out there.

As for quality of life post graft, ultimately this depends on quality of vision, although I accept other factors can count as well. It helps to be philosphical, but you are always going to measuring the result against somthing.

Andrew, great to hear you obtained driving vision.

[GarethB]

K Man,

I don't think it helps that we live in a world where if we don't get what we want we sue the pants off someone.

If a surgeon said you would have X quality of vision but you had Y which was worse, someone out there would sue for damages. fact of life is statistically there will be a group that will be worse off. Very small but possible.

[jayuk]

The Statistic would be absolutely useless; more useless then a Chocalate Teapot in fact.

Reason being, as alluded to earlier, each graft is unique and bespoke; and the skill of the consultant; in my opinion, plays a very large part in how well the initial tissue is re-attached. Therefore, a more "general" statistic, in my opinion, will not mean anything

I think this is why a PK or DALK or ay corneal transplant; excluding DLEK, is very hard to predict. If you see and understand just HOW sensitive the cornea is to change; be it surface or structural, you will further understand why predicating an outcome would be completely erroneous.

However, what we will now be seeing, in the coming 3-5 years, are various studies which are "eye unit" specific....as consultants have now realised that they really need to prove to patients what to realistically expect. Now whether this includes VA (which I would assume it WILL be; as one prominent UK consultant has a very good record over 10 years and aimt to provde a minimum VA - corrected at 6/10) we dont know...I guess that will be up to the consultant. But what we need to be aware of is the definition of Success; albeit with VA, Tissue, or overall graft.

J