Beitrag
von Jochen » 01.06.2005, 08:40
Eine Klinge für zwei Patienten ist natürlich völlig inakzeptabel und rein vom Gefühl her denke ich auch, dass ich lieber eine frische pro Auge hätte. Ich glaube auch nicht, dass sich jemand von 50€ Mehrkosten abhalten lassen würde wenn es tatsächlich eindeutig mehr Sicherheit bedeutet. Allerdings scheinen das die Chirurgen selbst kontrovers zu diskutieren, von daher glaube ich auch nicht, dass in Deutschland restlos alle Chirurgen mit zwei Klingen arbeiten:
"One Microkeratome or Two?
...... Dr. Maloney has studied the issue and concluded that using the same blade is safer and supports the case for simultaneous bilateral LASIK.“Of course, if there is any contamination on the first blade, there is the chance of carrying those organisms to the second eye,” Dr. Maloney noted. “Yet this has not happened in my practice. However, a small percentage of blades are defective or damaged, and the only way we find out is when the microkeratome cut produces the characteristic defect in the flap. If we do the first eye and don’t have any problems, we can be assured that the blade is not defective. On the other hand, if we do unilateral surgery, there is always a chance that a week later the new blade will be defective. So one needs to weigh the risk of carrying an infection from one eye to another against the risk that a new blade will be defective.”Dr. Maloney evaluated some 4,000 consecutive bilateral cases, many of which were done by beginning surgeons, and found that a defect in the flap was twice as likely to occur in the first eye than in the second eye.1 “This suggests to me that some percentage of flap defects were caused by defective blades,” he said."
Den Link zum kompletten Bericht (indem es eigentlich um die Diskussion geht ob es sinnvoll ist beide Augen in einer Sitzung zu behandeln) habe ich in den Linkbereich des Forums gestellt