Sorry for the delay. I had to retype it. I am hoping to provide you with the info.
You stated it was reasonable the surgeon to remove the residual matter at the time of surgery. However, in doing so caused problems. Was the surgeon negligent in the procedure in removing the residual matter???
A pre-examination should determine the residual lens to be removed and the procedure required. Also, consent was not given to remove the lens.
I did not want the lens to be removed. The lens kept the pupil intact and made the appearance of the eye, similar to my good eye. Now, the pupil is distorted, looks different to my good eye, no lens, very sensitive to light and constant pain. Constant inflammation and redness in my eye and throbbing and twitching. Furthermore, I am unable to make eye to eye contact with people fearing they would notice my eye.
The surgeon afterwards agreed he should have left the lens.
My vision was bad as a result of my childhood injury, when I was about 7. My level of vision is probably the same.
According to the Doctor, he stated during surgery I had a residual lens attached to it under the pupil and getting in the way of the view. So he decided to remove it. He said in a traditional vitrectomy you can pull it out but with 22 gauge you can’t.
I was awake during surgery. A local was used.
He started by repairing the retina, using laser and then gas. I remember feeling something cold in my eye. I am thinking it is the gas. Please confirm. I believe that part went very quickly. Please provide an estimate of time to complete.
Then I believe, he decided to remove the lens.
He said he opened the port bigger to take residual matter out. He said the lens kept getting stuck on the edge of the wound. Because the hole was bigger a lot of fluid started to come out and bleeding from the wound.
He was inserting a tool in and out of my eye. I clearly recall as he would in a quick motion insert the tool and pull it out. He was doing this on both ends of my eye. This resulted in about 7 stitches ( I am assuming there should have been no stitches if he had decided not to remove the lens). I felt he was rushed. He was working quickly. I heard him say he dropped the lens.
The operation went on for a long time. So he decided to end the operation to let everything stabilise. He put liquid in the eye.
Next day, he examined me. He said there is a clot on the pupil and he couldn't see in because of the liquid. He said that a 20 gauge tool is stronger to use.
Two weeks later I had another operation to remove the liquid. I don’t know what else he did. He put oil. Three months later I had surgery to remove the oil. The retina is reattached. However, I have been in pain since the first surgery happened in Feb, 2010. The pain level is constant between 2 to 5 out of 10. I have seen numerous other Doctors unable to help. Currently, I am managing my pain taking all precautions to avoid irritating my eye, such as avoiding sunlight (Interestingly, in my recent blood test, my vit D level was low). I control my pain with pain killers when the pain level reaches about 5.
If the operation was successful, I would think no stitches required. He would have been able to remove the lens matter, no bleeding. Use laser with gas and no liquid or oil and no further operations. Is that right? I believe the decision to remove the lens resulted in my problems.
Another doctor examined me. He said anterior segment showed that there is evidence of the fine emulsified oil droplets in the aphakic left eye. Few droplets of trapped silicone oil in the conjunctiva temporally and the nasal sclerostomy looks a little bit inflamed and thinned. The oil droplets may give high intraocular pressure and uveitis to explain the pain.
Also some ocular surface pain and mild ongoing inflammation leading to long term pain. The ocular is no longer smooth. There is a corneal scar just inferior to the visual axis.
Ok. You stated the equipment used was appropriate, the decision to remove the lens was reasonalble and it is understandable for failing to evaluate the residual matter in my eye.
However, a reasonable outcome for me was to remove the residual matter, repair the retina and use of gas and no further operations.
I look forward to your reply.
Thank you for your support.
I live in Australia. I would be willing to travel to US for treatment.