My thoughts on LASIK, Intralase, & Surface Abalation

If you are thinking about having Lasik, IntraLasik, PRK, LASEK, Epi-Lasik, RLE, or P-IOL eye surgery, this is the forum to research your concerns or ask your questions.

My thoughts on LASIK, Intralase, & Surface Abalation

Postby PROcrastin8er » Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:53 am

I've been having a real problem trying to get believable answers from doctors about the differences in these procedures. Each doctor in my area seems to have their own marketing and PR department to spin the information in their favor. I have a background in medical research, so I asked for some research articles on outcomes and long term corneal healing. What little they provided to me was produced by the manufacturers of the equipment, not by third parties.

So the waters have been muddied by all the hype, but here is what I've come away with:

1. LASIK and Intralase have aproximately the same success rates and healing times. The only real difference between these two involves the equipment used and THE SKILL OF THE SURGEON PERFORMING THE PROCEDURE. Users of the keratome want you to believe that Intralase is perforating the cornea with small explosions that create more scarring, while users of Intralase want you to believe that users of the keratome just can't afford to buy or lease the machines.

2. Most of the complications that occur are caused by the creation or healing of the flap used in LASIK and Intralase. Electron microscopy and histopathology show that both procedures cause scarring and keratinocyte formation, and don't fully heal in some patients for over 9 months. It doesn't matter if the laser cuts a steeper angle, or if the keratome slices rather than perforates. The tissue is cut and will create a layer of scar tissue...period. The amount of scarring is different for each patient, and can randomly affect visual acuity.

3.Surface ablation does not provide better results in visual acuity, but removes the risks involved in creating the flap. It is more painful and requires more healing time, but the result is the same. The techniques and the drugs used for this procedure have evolved. Currently, I believe this is the least invasive and safest procdedure, that also causes the least amount of scar tissue.

What are your thoughts about these procedures? What are your doctors telling you?
PROcrastin8er
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: My thoughts on LASIK, Intralase, & Surface Abalation

Postby LasikExpert » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:40 am

PROcrastin8er wrote:3.Surface ablation does not provide better results in visual acuity, but removes the risks involved in creating the flap. It is more painful and requires more healing time, but the result is the same. The techniques and the drugs used for this procedure have evolved. Currently, I believe this is the least invasive and safest procdedure, that also causes the least amount of scar tissue.


It is my opinion that for patients who are appropriate candidates for both Lasik and surface ablation, that the elimination of the possibility of Lasik flap related complications (no matter how small) of surface ablation is more beneficial.
Glenn Hagele
Volunteer Executive Director
USAEyes

Lasik Info &
Lasik Doctor Certification

I am not a doctor.
LasikExpert
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 6:43 am
Location: California


Return to Thinking About It

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

cron