Lasik Lawsuits

Texas Woman Sues Maker of LADARVision

Victim Says Eyes Were Injured by Alcon Laser System

(Dallas) A Lubbock County, Texas woman is suing the Fort Worth maker of a laser system used by doctors to perform LASIK eye surgery. According to the lawsuit, Sandra Brown v. Alcon Manufacturing, L.T.D. and Alcon Laboratories, Inc., the LADARVision laser is defective. The lawsuit accuses Alcon of ignoring warnings that may have prevented additional injuries.

A surgeon performed LASIK surgery on Dr. Brown, a fellow ophthalmologist, in April 2001, using the LADARVision laser. During the surgery, the laser performed erratically and removed too little tissue in an asymmetrical pattern from Dr. Brown�s eyes. As a result, she sustained permanent damage to her eyes resulting in limited vision. Unfortunately for Dr. Brown, at this time, her vision cannot be repaired by medical or surgical interventions.

I specifically waited for the LADARVision laser machine before having my surgery, and the wait cost me my vision, says Dr. Brown. I now have to live with damaged vision because of a defect in Alcon's laser. When I started looking into my problem, I realized that I was not alone and many other people have likewise been hurt by this same problem.

While horror stories associated with laser vision correction are not new, recent disturbing news about the Alcon LADARVision laser may cause victims to consider whether harm to their eyes was caused by the laser and not doctors and medical staff.

In the past, poor surgeries were usually blamed on the surgeon, says attorney Joel Fineberg, who represents Dr. Brown. There is now mounting evidence that the Alcon LADARVision laser is at the heart of many of these problems.

Surgeons throughout the country are questioning the effectiveness of the laser. In addition, an article authored by an Alcon consultant in the April 2003 issue of Opthalmology, reveals that patients treated with the LADARVision laser are twice as likely to need follow-up surgery. According to an investigative report in the London Times the rate of required retreatment might be even higher.

Patients go in expecting to come out with clearer vision, and many times they come out with permanent damage, says Mr. Fineberg. What we have here is a company that has decided to ignore serious concerns, raised by a physician, about the safety of their product.

http://www.legalpr.com/2-4-05_Lasik_Ladarvision_lawyer_joel_fineberg_rls.html