To re-graft or not re-graft, that is the question?

[Loopy-Lou]

Has anyone with grafts over 20 years old [and especially nearing the 30 mark] considered if they have a bad/worse eye whether they should go for a re-graft?
I’m just curious that’s all.
Do you wait for a graft to fail or do go for it before that point?

[Andrew MacLean]

"Whether it is nobler of the mind to suffer the slings and arrows in outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles ..."

1. Not me. My grafts are of much younger vintage and neither of them is in need of replacement.
2. I did have a neighbour who had one of her two grafts replaced: I think that the second graft was much larger and more radical than the first, but it worked fine.

Good to see you again Lou.

[Loopy-Lou]

hey Andrew.
I guess for me it troubles me more over time because what if the 'good' eye [the oldest] fails and there's no back up in the 'bad' eye.
Still can't get my head around the re-graft statistics

[Andrew MacLean]

I know, they are scary, but i guess that's more to do with the dire emergency in which these operations are contemplated as much as anything inherently hazardous in the procedure itself.

As I said, my neighbour did well after her re-graft.

[Loopy-Lou]

re-grafts are offered as non-emergencies too but 53% survival rate is not good if that's applicable to the UK