General Links:

-Home

-About Us

-Contact Us

-Lasik Definitions

-Patients Hurt From Lasik

-My Personal Story...

-Corneal Layers Hurt By Lasik Flaps

-35 Potential Problems
Lasik Surgeons Probably Won't Take The Time To Warn You About...


-New Technology Forthcoming

-Lasik Simulations many patients have Post Lasik

-Alcon, Visx, Mel 80 Laser

-Wavefront or Topographical

-What Doctor Can I Trust

-Thickness of The Cornea

-PreSurgery Expectations

-Expert Medical Witnesses

-Post Lasik Doctors That May Help
 

Other Lasik Websites

-Other Lasik Websites-

-Pupil Size Does Matter

-Lasik Consumer Reports

-File A Complaint With The Department of Regulation in Chicago

-File FDA Complaint 

-FDA Approved Lasers

-James Oreilly's Calls "Eye For Eye"
 

Lasik Lawsuit Info:

-Other Lasik Websites

-
-Be Very Careful Of "So Called" Lasik Certifications: CRSQA:

-MalpracticeWeb

-Nick Caro has NO Insurance Since 2000, Do you know why...

 -Nick Caro, defendant in 50+ medical malpractice cases...

-Lawyers & Settlements wants to hear your about  Lasik Gone Bad-


-Do you believe YOUR DOCTOR botched your Lasik?  Contact News Reporter:  dvsavini@cbs.com-
 

Other Lasik News Coming:

An alarming 20-35% of eyeballs that have these procedures have many of the following systems:

-Blindness & Corneal Transplants.
-Halos & Starbursts.
-Ghosting & Double Vision.
-Poor Night Vision.
-Severe Dry Eye Syndrome.
-Droopy Eye Lid.
-Depression & Suicide.
-Hazing & Blurry Vision.
-Ectasia (Bubbling of the cornea).
-Any many more vision disorders.


And if your lasik surgeon has no insurance, what does that say about this person and their practice?  Do you really want to open this can of worms?  It may be in your best interest to be patient and wait a few more years before you decide to do something that could compromise your health and leave you "helpless."


Dimitri Caro, Spiro Caro, Nick Caro, Peggy Caro: Dimitri Caro, Spiro Caro, Nick Caro, Peggy Caro:

U.S. Marshalls Seize "Homegrown" Laser Owned by Dr. Nicholas Caro
-Click here to see Nick Caro Exposed-

Food and Drug Administration
2098 Gaither Road
Rockville, MD 20850

WARNING LETTER

Nicholas C. Caro, M.D.
4145 W. Peterson, Suite 200
Chicago, Illinois 60640

Dear Dr. Caro,

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspected your medical practice
located at the above address on April 23, 1997, and determined that you
have an unapproved excimer laser system, which was manufactured by
Photon Data, Inc., Winter Park, Florida and assembled by [name redacted
by FDA] Excimer Laser systems are considered to be devices within the
meaning of section 201(h) of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the Act).
 Excimer laser systems are Class III devices which are required to have
in effect an approved application for premarket approval (PMA) or an
approved Investigational Device Exemption (IDE).

On January 24, 1997, you submitted an application for an IDE for your
excimer laser system for use in refractive eye surgery.  On February
14, 1997, the Office of Device Evaluation (ODE) at FDA's Center for
Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) sent you a letter disapproving
your IDE application.  You may not use your excimer laser system to
treat human subjects until you have received either an approved PMA
under section 515(a) of the Act, or an approved IDE under section
520(g).

Your excimer laser system is adulterated under section 501(f)(1)(B) of
the Act because it is a Class III device under section 513(f), which is
required to have in effect an approved PMA or an approved IDE, and no
such PMA or IDE is in effect for it.  Medical devices used by
physicians in the course of their practice to treat patients are
"marketed" and "held for sale" within the meaning of the Act.  Further,
your continued use of this device to treat patients is also a violation
of the Act.

In addition, your excimer laser system must comply with the
requirements of Federal Performance Standards for lasers which are
found in 21 CFR Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1040.
 We acknowledge receipt of a Laser Product Report from you for this
excimer laser system.  However, FDA found this Report to be deficient.
Therefore, your excimer laser system is in violation of the Federal
Performance Standards for lasers.

Please note that FDA does not consider your excimer laser to be a
custom device.  Section 520(b) of the Act establishes five conditions,
each of which must be met by a device to be a custom device.  The Act's
custom device definition requires that the device be made to meet
either the specific anatomical requirements of an individual patient or
the special needs of an individual practitioner; a practitioner's
special needs may be either an individual anatomical need or a special
practice need that is not shared by other physicians.

We do not believe the requirements of your medical practice are unique
because they are shared by numerous other health professionals.  In
addition, we do not believe your device is designed to meet any special
anatomical needs that you or an individual patient of yours may have.
Accordingly, your laser is not a custom device and is not exempt from
the requirement under the Act that this device must have an approved
PMA or IDE in effect.

Please notify this office within 15 working days of your receipt of
this letter as to what, if any, actions you are taking or plan to take
to bring your device into compliance with the Act.  Your response
should also clearly state whether or not you have ceased using the
device to treat patients.  Failure to immediately and completely cease
clinical use of the device upon receipt of this letter, and failure to
bring your device into compliance with the Act, may result in
regulatory action by FDA without further notice.  These actions
include, but are not limited to, seizure, injunction, and/or civil
penalties.  Please note that no extensions of the 15 day response
period will be given.

Your response should be sent to the attention of Mary-Lou Davis,
Dental, ENT and Ophthalmic Devices Branch (HFZ-331) at the letterhead
address.  In addition, please send a copy of your response to Mr.
Stephen Dr. Eich, Compliance Officer, Food and Drug Administration, 300
S. Riverside Plaza, 5th Floor, Suite 550 South, Chicago, Illinois
60606.  If you have further questions, please contact Mary-Lou Davis at
(301) 594-4613 extension 127 or FAX:  (301) 594-4638.

Sincerely yours,
Lillian J. Gill
Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Devices and Radiological Health


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The FDA ultimately seized Dr. Nicholas Caro's "homegrown" laser as is
documented here:  www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/ANS00828.html


FDA SEIZES "ILLEGAL" HOMEGROWN/UNAUTHORIZED LASER FROM: DR. NICKOLAS CARO, MD &
SAINT GEORGE CORRECTIVE VISION CENTER
ON SEPTEMBER 2ND, 1998.
To ensure that only approved excimer lasers are used to treat nearsightedness and other eye conditions, FDA initiated the seizure of unapproved lasers worth millions of dollars.  Consumers should make sure any laser surgery they undergo is done only with approved lasers or in an FDA-monitored clinical study. Unapproved lasers pose a risk of serious eye injury.  FDA has approved only two lasers as safe and effective for eye surgery. One is manufactured by Summit Technology Inc., of Waltham, Mass., the other by VISX Inc, of Santa Clara, Calif. Several others are in FDA-sanctioned clinical trials.   The lasers treat nearsightedness with photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), a procedure in which the surgeon reshapes the cornea with ultraviolet light bursts from the laser.

-The FDA continues to investigate unapproved lasers-