= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielVarga comments on Open Thread February 25 - March 3 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (354)
My eye doctor diagnosed closed-angle glaucoma, and recommends an iridectomy. I think he might be a bit too trigger-happy, so I followed up with another doctor, and she didn't find the glaucoma. She carefully stated that the first diagnosis can still be the correct one, the first was a more complete examination.
Any insights about the pros and cons of iridectomy?
My impression is that glaucoma (which is, basically, too high intraocular pressure) is easy to diagnose. Two doctors disagreeing on it would worry me.
Don't get just a third independent opinion, get a fourth one as well.
It was less than a disagreement. I'm sorry that I over-emphasized this point. The first time the pressure was Hgmm 26/18, the second time 19/17. The second doctor said that the pressure can fluctuate, and her equipment is not enough to settle the question. (She is an I-don't-know-the-correct-term national health service doctor, the first one is an expensive private doctor with better equipment, and more time for a patient.)
My recommendation for more independent opinions (or, actually, more measurements) stands.
Get a third independent opinion.
Do not prime the third doctor with the first two results if possible.
Is there a family history of this? If so that would skew my assessment towards that of the first doctor. If not, seriously another opinion...
No family history.
Can you ask the second doctor to examine you to at least the same standard as the first one?
Maybe someone on Less Wrong who has access to UpToDate can send you a copy of their glaucoma page, for an authoritative list of pros and cons.
Unfortunately, no. See my answer to Lumifer.
Laser iridotomy appears to be less risky:
http://www.surgeryencyclopedia.com/La-Pa/Laser-Iridotomy.html
http://www.surgeryencyclopedia.com/Fi-La/Iridectomy.html
What he proposed is in fact laser iridotomy, although they called it laser iridectomy.