Need some hope: stopping progression?
Question:
Checkout wrote: > I was not diagnosed early and had moderate loss of vision in my right > eye when initially treated just over five years ago. Thus far there > has been no further deterioration. Medication and treatment has been > changed from time to time, either because the drops were not as > efficatious as expected or because I developed side effects. > Good luck > Checkout
Thank you. It’s encouraging to know that over five years you have not had any further deterioration. I have just started on Xalatan but won’t know for another ten days whether it is working. I have normal tension glaucoma so that is apparently harder to treat. -Gudrun
Response:
Hubert Mak wrote: > The following factors may change the outcome of your treatment, > just for example: > 1 – your age.
Age in terms of how much longer you need to be able to see? Or is there a difference between the way the elderly and younger people respond to treatment? > 2 – your life style. > 3 – over use.(such as watch late-nite show or movie after 8 hours > on computer.) > 4 – your general health condition.
So if you are in good health, the visual damage is less likely to progress? > 5 – side effects.(such as some side effects may kill you before > you get blind.) > 6 – your financial health condition.
Meaning whether you can afford to see a top specialist? > 7 – your luck.(healthcare professional are human, sometime > may do some mistakes. just for example)
Yes, I know, I had the great misfortune of having lost more vision due to original misdiagnosis. I sure hope my luck changes at some point. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hope this helps. > ————————————————————— > Just an average dummie, I’m not healthcare professional or > engineer. > —————————————————————- > On 12 Feb 2005, gudrun17 wrote: > > I am newly diagnosed with moderate visual field loss in one eye. Or > > that’s what the GS said; I perceive a lot of loss. I’d like to hear > > from people who were not diagnosed early, meaning before they had > > vision loss, for whom progressive loss was stopped or greatly slowed > > once treatment began. Like most new patients I am terrified of going > > blind in that eye. All the GS said was "you have a lot of nerve fiber > > left," which was supposed to be encouraging, but if you supposedly lose > > half the nerve fiber before there is visual field loss, how could you > > have "a lot" left? > > Anyway, thanks for any encouragement. > > -Gudrun
Response:
Dr. Leukoma wrote: > Gudrun, > I have been following your story with interest. I haven’t yet read > that you have been diagnosed with glaucoma, despite having consulted > with a glaucoma specialist. Do you now have a diagnosis of glaucoma > for your visual field loss? Also, is this visual field defect > repeatable? > DrG
Thank you for your interest, Dr. G. Yes, I was diagnosed with normal tension glaucoma although the glaucoma specialist said my case is "atypical." He said the appearance of the optic nerve head does not quite match the visual field defect, and he also said I am seeing more visual disturbance than the visual field test shows. Yes, I had two visual field tests about ten days apart and although I didn’t get a chance to get a good look at them, other than over the doctor’s shoulder, they appeared to be similar so I guess that means it was repeatable. There is obviously a visual field defect and there is some thinning of the optic nerve fiber layer as shown by OCT. As I noted in another post, there are a couple of other seemingly unusual things about my case–for example, the GS said with the kind of visual field defect I have there ought to be a difference in pupillary reaction and although he tested with the flashlight for a long time, he couldn’t see any. He finally asked if I detected any difference in brightness between the two eyes. I’m not sure of the significance of any of these "atypical" things; he just said he would need to follow my case more closely. I am on Xalatan. Basically the GS said although there are some unusal aspects, it is glaucoma because there was nothing else he knew of that it could be. Your comments are most welcome and appreciated. -Gudrun
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -gudrun17 wrote: > Dr. Leukoma wrote: > > Gudrun, > > I have been following your story with interest. I haven’t yet read > > that you have been diagnosed with glaucoma, despite having consulted > > with a glaucoma specialist. Do you now have a diagnosis of glaucoma > > for your visual field loss? Also, is this visual field defect > > repeatable? > > DrG > Thank you for your interest, Dr. G. Yes, I was diagnosed with normal > tension glaucoma although the glaucoma specialist said my case is > "atypical." He said the appearance of the optic nerve head does not > quite match the visual field defect, and he also said I am seeing more > visual disturbance than the visual field test shows. Yes, I had two > visual field tests about ten days apart and although I didn’t get a > chance to get a good look at them, other than over the doctor’s > shoulder, they appeared to be similar so I guess that means it was > repeatable. There is obviously a visual field defect and there is some > thinning of the optic nerve fiber layer as shown by OCT. As I noted in > another post, there are a couple of other seemingly unusual things > about my case–for example, the GS said with the kind of visual field > defect I have there ought to be a difference in pupillary reaction and > although he tested with the flashlight for a long time, he couldn’t see > any. He finally asked if I detected any difference in brightness > between the two eyes. I’m not sure of the significance of any of these > "atypical" things; he just said he would need to follow my case more > closely. I am on Xalatan. > Basically the GS said although there are some unusal aspects, it is > glaucoma because there was nothing else he knew of that it could be. > Your comments are most welcome and appreciated. > -Gudrun
Hmmm. A diagnosis based on exclusion. I’m sure the the usual suspects were ruled-out, such as a vitreoretinal cause, or optic neuritis… Anyway, I hope that the Xalatan does the trick. DrG
Response:
I am newly diagnosed with moderate visual field loss in one eye. Or that’s what the GS said; I perceive a lot of loss. I’d like to hear from people who were not diagnosed early, meaning before they had vision loss, for whom progressive loss was stopped or greatly slowed once treatment began. Like most new patients I am terrified of going blind in that eye. All the GS said was "you have a lot of nerve fiber left," which was supposed to be encouraging, but if you supposedly lose half the nerve fiber before there is visual field loss, how could you have "a lot" left? Anyway, thanks for any encouragement. -Gudrun
Response:
Gudrun, I have been following your story with interest. I haven’t yet read that you have been diagnosed with glaucoma, despite having consulted with a glaucoma specialist. Do you now have a diagnosis of glaucoma for your visual field loss? Also, is this visual field defect repeatable? DrG – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -gudrun17 wrote: > Hubert Mak wrote: > > The following factors may change the outcome of your treatment, > > just for example: > > 1 – your age. > Age in terms of how much longer you need to be able to see? Or is there > a difference between the way the elderly and younger people respond to > treatment? > > 2 – your life style. > > 3 – over use.(such as watch late-nite show or movie after 8 hours > > on computer.) > > 4 – your general health condition. > So if you are in good health, the visual damage is less likely to > progress? > > 5 – side effects.(such as some side effects may kill you before > > you get blind.) > > 6 – your financial health condition. > Meaning whether you can afford to see a top specialist? > > 7 – your luck.(healthcare professional are human, sometime > > may do some mistakes. just for example) > Yes, I know, I had the great misfortune of having lost more vision due > to original misdiagnosis. I sure hope my luck changes at some point. > > Hope this helps. > > ————————————————————— > > Just an average dummie, I’m not healthcare professional or > > engineer. > > —————————————————————- > > On 12 Feb 2005, gudrun17 wrote: > > > I am newly diagnosed with moderate visual field loss in one eye. Or > > > that’s what the GS said; I perceive a lot of loss. I’d like to hear > > > from people who were not diagnosed early, meaning before they had > > > vision loss, for whom progressive loss was stopped or greatly > slowed > > > once treatment began. Like most new patients I am terrified of > going > > > blind in that eye. All the GS said was "you have a lot of nerve > fiber > > > left," which was supposed to be encouraging, but if you supposedly > lose > > > half the nerve fiber before there is visual field loss, how could > you > > > have "a lot" left? > > > Anyway, thanks for any encouragement. > > > -Gudrun
Response:
beside the treatment itself, these seven factors are essential for your decision making process and it is definitly effects the outcomes of the treatment. please do some search in the internet for more details, i guess the google search is a good start. you must do this work yourself, any individual case are different and privacy problem involved. —————————————————— On 18 Feb 2005, gudrun17 wrote: > Hubert Mak wrote: > > The following factors may change the outcome of your treatment, > > just for example: > > 1 – your age. > Age in terms of how much longer you need to be able to see? Or is there > a difference between the way the elderly and younger people respond to > treatment?
yes, this only one of the reasons. ask your doctor. > > 2 – your life style. > > 3 – over use.(such as watch late-nite show or movie after 8 hours > > on computer.) > > 4 – your general health condition. > So if you are in good health, the visual damage is less likely to > progress?
Yes, this is one of the reasons. please do some search,and ask your doctor. > > 5 – side effects.(such as some side effects may kill you before > > you get blind.) > > 6 – your financial health condition. > Meaning whether you can afford to see a top specialist?
definitely yes. but this is one of the reasons, there are many other factors if your are poor. please do some more search yourself. > > 7 – your luck.(healthcare professional are human, sometime > > may do some mistakes. just for example) > Yes, I know, I had the great misfortune of having lost more vision due > to original misdiagnosis. I sure hope my luck changes at some point.
misdiagnosis is not the only one factor, you must do some more search to understand how this business setup and running, just for example. > > Hope this helps. > > ————————————————————— > > Just an average dummie, I’m not healthcare professional or > > engineer. > > —————————————————————- > > > Anyway, thanks for any encouragement. > > > -Gudrun
———————————————————————-
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Fred May wrote: > Gudrun > You asked for advice from anyone with Normal Tension Glaucoma, > who had suffered some vision loss before diagnosis, but had the loss > of vision halted by medical intervention. Well I fit the bill. > I was first diagnosed with possible glaucoma in September 1997 with > pressures > in both eyes of 23. I was placed on Betagan drops to reduce the pressures > to 19. > Unfortunately this was not enough and although visiting the Glaucoma > specialist > six times in the following 9 months, I lost 11% of my vision in the right > eye. > The dead patch was just above the fovea in the close-in vision. The most > annoying thing about it was that I had to discover it for myself, a few days > after my > penultimate visit to this incompetent fool, whose advice to me had been > "Come back in 5 months time." How much of my vision would have been left if > I > had followed this advice I shudder to think. > Well the end of this long story is that I consulted my G.P. to get a second > opinion > from the leading specialist in Sydney and he diagnosed NTG and reduced my > pressures > to around 11 by a combination of medication and laser treatment. This > stopped the > deterioration in my vision immediately. He suggested that the maximum > pressure in the right eye, > which had the worst NTG, should be kept below 14. The left eye is not so > critical but probably > should be kept below 16. I have had further laser treatment in the right > eye 18 months ago as the > pressures have gradually increased. There has been no significant further > deterioration in either eye > since changing my specialist. > Fred May > Aged 75
Thank you for your post. Yes, I can sympathize–my retina specialist kept telling me my diminishing peripheral vision was due to a detached vitreous and would get better on its own, and when I kept telling him it was getting worse, that’s what he would say, come back in two months. I wish I had done what you did and got a third opinion right away instead of trusting him and his colleagues and losing more vision over five months. Right now I have seen two glaucoma specialists–the first one is not in any hurry and put me on Xalatan and said come back in a month. Fortunately the good one I saw right after him put me on Xalatan for two weeks, to which I did not respond, and now has me on Lumigan. I will find out next week if that’s doing anything. The other doctor would have left me to lose more vision over a month of using Xalatan doing nothing at all. I would guess that if the medications do not work the next step is laser surgery–I had heard it is often not too effective for NTG so I’m glad to hear it helped with yours. I personally would rather not go through months of trying all sorts of eyedrops and losing more vision if none work or work well enough. Wish I could find someone to take a more aggressive approach, as your specialist has. -Gudrun
Response:
"gudrun17" <yng…@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1108928203.100298.318580@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Dr. Leukoma wrote: >> gudrun17 wrote: >> > Dr. Leukoma wrote: >> > > Gudrun, >> > > I have been following your story with interest. I haven’t yet > read >> > > that you have been diagnosed with glaucoma, despite having >> consulted >> > > with a glaucoma specialist. Do you now have a diagnosis of >> glaucoma >> > > for your visual field loss? Also, is this visual field defect >> > > repeatable? >> > > DrG >> > Thank you for your interest, Dr. G. Yes, I was diagnosed with > normal >> > tension glaucoma although the glaucoma specialist said my case is >> > "atypical." He said the appearance of the optic nerve head does not >> > quite match the visual field defect, and he also said I am seeing >> more >> > visual disturbance than the visual field test shows. Yes, I had two >> > visual field tests about ten days apart and although I didn’t get a >> > chance to get a good look at them, other than over the doctor’s >> > shoulder, they appeared to be similar so I guess that means it was >> > repeatable. There is obviously a visual field defect and there is >> some >> > thinning of the optic nerve fiber layer as shown by OCT. As I noted >> in >> > another post, there are a couple of other seemingly unusual things >> > about my case–for example, the GS said with the kind of visual > field >> > defect I have there ought to be a difference in pupillary reaction >> and >> > although he tested with the flashlight for a long time, he couldn’t >> see >> > any. He finally asked if I detected any difference in brightness >> > between the two eyes. I’m not sure of the significance of any of >> these >> > "atypical" things; he just said he would need to follow my case > more >> > closely. I am on Xalatan. >> > Basically the GS said although there are some unusal aspects, it is >> > glaucoma because there was nothing else he knew of that it could > be. >> > Your comments are most welcome and appreciated. >> > -Gudrun >> Hmmm. A diagnosis based on exclusion. I’m sure the the usual > suspects >> were ruled-out, such as a vitreoretinal cause, or optic neuritis… >> Anyway, I hope that the Xalatan does the trick. >> DrG > Thank you, Dr. G. I assume that optic neuritis would have been detected > during dilated eye exams. I also assume that a vitreoretinal cause, if > not detected over several months of exams by the retinal specialist, > would have been ruled out when the OCT showed thinning of the optic > nerve fiber layer. > I am not very comfortable with being considered an atypical case by all > of the specialists I have been seeing; I still fear that something is > being missed. I am getting a second opinion but so far he has not done > any other kinds of tests–I’ve only had the visual fields, the OCT, > some photos of the optic nerve and dilated eye exams/pressure checks, > of course. I am still scared something is being missed. I can’t by > myself of course tell if the Xalatan is helping–I’ve only been on it > about ten days–so although I still feel I am continuing to lose > vision, at this point I don’t know what else I can do but take the > drops and wait. Thank you again for your good wishes and interest. > -Gudrun
Gudrun You asked for advice from anyone with Normal Tension Glaucoma, who had suffered some vision loss before diagnosis, but had the loss of vision halted by medical intervention. Well I fit the bill. I was first diagnosed with possible glaucoma in September 1997 with pressures in both eyes of 23. I was placed on Betagan drops to reduce the pressures to 19. Unfortunately this was not enough and although visiting the Glaucoma specialist six times in the following 9 months, I lost 11% of my vision in the right eye. The dead patch was just above the fovea in the close-in vision. The most annoying thing about it was that I had to discover it for myself, a few days after my penultimate visit to this incompetent fool, whose advice to me had been "Come back in 5 months time." How much of my vision would have been left if I had followed this advice I shudder to think. Well the end of this long story is that I consulted my G.P. to get a second opinion from the leading specialist in Sydney and he diagnosed NTG and reduced my pressures to around 11 by a combination of medication and laser treatment. This stopped the deterioration in my vision immediately. He suggested that the maximum pressure in the right eye, which had the worst NTG, should be kept below 14. The left eye is not so critical but probably should be kept below 16. I have had further laser treatment in the right eye 18 months ago as the pressures have gradually increased. There has been no significant further deterioration in either eye since changing my specialist. Fred May Aged 75
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Dr. Leukoma wrote: > gudrun17 wrote: > > Dr. Leukoma wrote: > > > Gudrun, > > > I have been following your story with interest. I haven’t yet read > > > that you have been diagnosed with glaucoma, despite having > consulted > > > with a glaucoma specialist. Do you now have a diagnosis of > glaucoma > > > for your visual field loss? Also, is this visual field defect > > > repeatable? > > > DrG > > Thank you for your interest, Dr. G. Yes, I was diagnosed with normal > > tension glaucoma although the glaucoma specialist said my case is > > "atypical." He said the appearance of the optic nerve head does not > > quite match the visual field defect, and he also said I am seeing > more > > visual disturbance than the visual field test shows. Yes, I had two > > visual field tests about ten days apart and although I didn’t get a > > chance to get a good look at them, other than over the doctor’s > > shoulder, they appeared to be similar so I guess that means it was > > repeatable. There is obviously a visual field defect and there is > some > > thinning of the optic nerve fiber layer as shown by OCT. As I noted > in > > another post, there are a couple of other seemingly unusual things > > about my case–for example, the GS said with the kind of visual field > > defect I have there ought to be a difference in pupillary reaction > and > > although he tested with the flashlight for a long time, he couldn’t > see > > any. He finally asked if I detected any difference in brightness > > between the two eyes. I’m not sure of the significance of any of > these > > "atypical" things; he just said he would need to follow my case more > > closely. I am on Xalatan. > > Basically the GS said although there are some unusal aspects, it is > > glaucoma because there was nothing else he knew of that it could be. > > Your comments are most welcome and appreciated. > > -Gudrun > Hmmm. A diagnosis based on exclusion. I’m sure the the usual suspects > were ruled-out, such as a vitreoretinal cause, or optic neuritis… > Anyway, I hope that the Xalatan does the trick. > DrG
Thank you, Dr. G. I assume that optic neuritis would have been detected during dilated eye exams. I also assume that a vitreoretinal cause, if not detected over several months of exams by the retinal specialist, would have been ruled out when the OCT showed thinning of the optic nerve fiber layer. I am not very comfortable with being considered an atypical case by all of the specialists I have been seeing; I still fear that something is being missed. I am getting a second opinion but so far he has not done any other kinds of tests–I’ve only had the visual fields, the OCT, some photos of the optic nerve and dilated eye exams/pressure checks, of course. I am still scared something is being missed. I can’t by myself of course tell if the Xalatan is helping–I’ve only been on it about ten days–so although I still feel I am continuing to lose vision, at this point I don’t know what else I can do but take the drops and wait. Thank you again for your good wishes and interest. -Gudrun
Response:
Dr. Leukoma wrote: > Hi Gudrun. > The doctors seem not to be responding so much to your perception of the > field loss as to their objective measurements of your field loss. > Would that be an accurate statement? > DrG
Yes, because the only "real" visual field tests I have had were done three weeks ago, about nine days apart. I was told there wasn’t much difference between those two tests. I don’t have any visual field tests from Sept. when I first noticed the loss of vision, so I have no objective measurement to show the doctors that I have been progressively losing more vision. I had been keeping track of it myself the only way that was available to me, which an online visual field test. The doctors do have those printouts which show I was progressively missing more dots within twenty and now within ten degrees of fixation, but I realize that’s not the same as a professional in-office visual field analyzer. So basically, I cannot prove that I have been losing more vision over the past six months because my retina specialist only just now agreed to order a visual field test–previously his advice was just to wait and see if it got better. I am scheduled for another visual field test in about two weeks. If it shows no more progression, then I’ll be relieved. If it does show progression, I hope my glaucoma specialist will consider more aggressive treatment. -Gudrun
Response:
Gee, it’s not very encouraging that only one person had no more or very little progression once treatment started. Is it that unusual? -Gudrun, adding to first message
Response:
"gudrun17" <yng…@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1108268946.844595.243180@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com… I am newly diagnosed with moderate visual field loss in one eye. Or that’s what the GS said; I perceive a lot of loss. I’d like to hear from people who were not diagnosed early, meaning before they had vision loss, for whom progressive loss was stopped or greatly slowed once treatment began. Like most new patients I am terrified of going blind in that eye. All the GS said was "you have a lot of nerve fiber left," which was supposed to be encouraging, but if you supposedly lose half the nerve fiber before there is visual field loss, how could you have "a lot" left? Anyway, thanks for any encouragement. -Gudrun I was not diagnosed early and had moderate loss of vision in my right eye when initially treated just over five years ago. Thus far there has been no further deterioration. Medication and treatment has been changed from time to time, either because the drops were not as efficatious as expected or because I developed side effects. Good luck Checkout
Response:
To be honest, Gudrun, you don’t sound that atypical to me. It is uncommon to see pupillary abnormalities in glaucoma, unless the GS was looking for optic neuritis, in which they are quite common. I don’t spend much time studying the pupils in glaucoma patients. In anyone who is considered atypical based on their field loss vs. the region of possible optic nerve damage, I would recommend neuro imaging with an MRI. It is unlikely to show anything, but still, looking for signs of demyelination (as in optic neuritis or multiple sclerosis) or any potential compressive lesion (e.g. benign pituitary tumors, optic nerve gliomas, etc.) is a reasonable idea. It certainly couldn’t hurt (unless you are particularly claustrophobic). Keep your chin up! Studies show that even in low tension (or normal tension) glaucoma, lowering the IOP does help to slow progressive VF loss. Keep us informed. –Rick Cohn, MD Glaucoma Specialist Winter Park, FL
Response:
Thank you, Dr. Cohn. Yes, what the glaucoma specialist said was atypical is that the appearance of the optic nerve head does not quite match the visual field defect, and that I am seeing more vision loss than was shown on the visual field tests. For what it’s worth, and I guess it doesn’t mean much, I had HRT today which actually only showed one borderline measurement in the affected eye; the rest were within normal limits. Of course I can’t interpret the test but the GS said that probably the reason everyone missed the glaucoma diagnosis was because there is some natural asymmetry between the two optic nerves but otherwise they both look pretty healthy. I realize that HRT is used to track changes rather than diagnose. You are right, I guess the other GS was looking for optic neuritis when he spent so much time comparing pupillary reaction. Possibly because the color red does look more faded in the bad eye–both doctors remarked on that but didn’t seem to pursue it any further. Thank you–I am trying to keep my chin up but am not doing very well. Xalatan had no effect so now I am starting Lumigan. I am very afraid that I am going to turn out to be one of those patients for whom no treatment works and I will just keep losing vision. The GS said that Lumigan works in 70 percent of patients who don’t respond to Xalatan so I hope for once my luck will change. This whole ordeal has been just one misfortunate turn after another. -Gudrun – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -eyegu…@aol.com wrote: > To be honest, Gudrun, you don’t sound that atypical to me. It is > uncommon to see pupillary abnormalities in glaucoma, unless the GS was > looking for optic neuritis, in which they are quite common. I don’t > spend much time studying the pupils in glaucoma patients. In anyone > who is considered atypical based on their field loss vs. the region of > possible optic nerve damage, I would recommend neuro imaging with an > MRI. It is unlikely to show anything, but still, looking for signs of > demyelination (as in optic neuritis or multiple sclerosis) or any > potential compressive lesion (e.g. benign pituitary tumors, optic nerve > gliomas, etc.) is a reasonable idea. It certainly couldn’t hurt > (unless you are particularly claustrophobic). > Keep your chin up! Studies show that even in low tension (or > normal tension) glaucoma, lowering the IOP does help to slow > progressive VF loss. Keep us informed. > –Rick Cohn, MD > Glaucoma Specialist > Winter Park, FL
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -gudrun17 wrote: > Fred May wrote: > > Gudrun > > You asked for advice from anyone with Normal Tension Glaucoma, > > who had suffered some vision loss before diagnosis, but had the loss > > of vision halted by medical intervention. Well I fit the bill. > > I was first diagnosed with possible glaucoma in September 1997 with > > pressures > > in both eyes of 23. I was placed on Betagan drops to reduce the > pressures > > to 19. > > Unfortunately this was not enough and although visiting the Glaucoma > > specialist > > six times in the following 9 months, I lost 11% of my vision in the > right > > eye. > > The dead patch was just above the fovea in the close-in vision. The > most > > annoying thing about it was that I had to discover it for myself, a > few days > > after my > > penultimate visit to this incompetent fool, whose advice to me had > been > > "Come back in 5 months time." How much of my vision would have been > left if > > I > > had followed this advice I shudder to think. > > Well the end of this long story is that I consulted my G.P. to get a > second > > opinion > > from the leading specialist in Sydney and he diagnosed NTG and > reduced my > > pressures > > to around 11 by a combination of medication and laser treatment. > This > > stopped the > > deterioration in my vision immediately. He suggested that the > maximum > > pressure in the right eye, > > which had the worst NTG, should be kept below 14. The left eye is > not so > > critical but probably > > should be kept below 16. I have had further laser treatment in the > right > > eye 18 months ago as the > > pressures have gradually increased. There has been no significant > further > > deterioration in either eye > > since changing my specialist. > > Fred May > > Aged 75 > Thank you for your post. Yes, I can sympathize–my retina specialist > kept telling me my diminishing peripheral vision was due to a detached > vitreous and would get better on its own, and when I kept telling him > it was getting worse, that’s what he would say, come back in two > months. I wish I had done what you did and got a third opinion right > away instead of trusting him and his colleagues and losing more vision > over five months. Right now I have seen two glaucoma specialists–the > first one is not in any hurry and put me on Xalatan and said come back > in a month. Fortunately the good one I saw right after him put me on > Xalatan for two weeks, to which I did not respond, and now has me on > Lumigan. I will find out next week if that’s doing anything. The other > doctor would have left me to lose more vision over a month of using > Xalatan doing nothing at all. I would guess that if the medications do > not work the next step is laser surgery–I had heard it is often not > too effective for NTG so I’m glad to hear it helped with yours. I > personally would rather not go through months of trying all sorts of > eyedrops and losing more vision if none work or work well enough. Wish > I could find someone to take a more aggressive approach, as your > specialist has. > -Gudrun
Hi Gudrun. The doctors seem not to be responding so much to your perception of the field loss as to their objective measurements of your field loss. Would that be an accurate statement? DrG
Response:
The following factors may change the outcome of your treatment, just for example: 1 – your age. 2 – your life style. 3 – over use.(such as watch late-nite show or movie after 8 hours on computer.) 4 – your general health condition. 5 – side effects.(such as some side effects may kill you before you get blind.) 6 – your financial health condition. 7 – your luck.(healthcare professional are human, sometime may do some mistakes. just for example) Hope this helps. ————————————————————— Just an average dummie, I’m not healthcare professional or engineer. —————————————————————- On 12 Feb 2005, gudrun17 wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I am newly diagnosed with moderate visual field loss in one eye. Or > that’s what the GS said; I perceive a lot of loss. I’d like to hear > from people who were not diagnosed early, meaning before they had > vision loss, for whom progressive loss was stopped or greatly slowed > once treatment began. Like most new patients I am terrified of going > blind in that eye. All the GS said was "you have a lot of nerve fiber > left," which was supposed to be encouraging, but if you supposedly lose > half the nerve fiber before there is visual field loss, how could you > have "a lot" left? > Anyway, thanks for any encouragement. > -Gudrun
Response:
Related Posts
- I am a Doctor but I don't play one on the internet
- glaucoma and tinnitus
- How do I keep my mask on all night?
- Vision foggy
- glaucoma and bodybuilding
- Jackson Update
- Eye Drops & Pulmonary Problems
- Glaucoma and swimming
- Ophthalmic beta-blockers and Bradycardia
- Just Found OUt I have Glaucoma