PRK or LASIK

[michaelscai]

I'm considering PRK instead of LASIK from the stuff I read here, am I a good candidate? I'm 39 and -6 on one eye and -1.75 on the other, have enough thickness for Lasik

are there any downside of PRK other than more discomfort and longer recovery time?

[LasikExpert]

I am biased toward PRK for one simple reason: No Lasik flap means no possibility of a Lasik flap complication. Even though the probability of a Lasik flap complication is low, no possibility is almost always going to be better than a low probability.

PRK has a slightly higher risk of infection, which is accommodated with medication.

Discuss your options with a competent surgeon after a comprehensive examination.

[PRKorIntacs]

Perhaps consider getting PRK in the -6 eye and leave the other alone for monovision. If monovision isn't for you, get the -6 eye down to -1.75 to match the other eye and eliminate anisometropia/aniseikonia.

[michaelscai]

Perhaps consider getting PRK in the -6 eye and leave the other alone for monovision. If monovision isn't for you, get the -6 eye down to -1.75 to match the other eye and eliminate anisometropia/aniseikonia.

interesting thoughts. if I get the -6 eye down to -1.75, do I still have the option of further correction without much complication to 20/20 if I want to do that later?

what's the monovision you are refering to?

is there any other downside for PRK vs lasik other than initial discomfort, higher infection possiility? I read lasik is about 90% of lasik surgery, if PRK is superior for long term, why don't more people opt for PRK..

thanks.

[LasikExpert]

if I get the -6 eye down to -1.75, do I still have the option of further correction without much complication to 20/20 if I want to do that later?

Yes. In theory, you can have as many enhancement surgeries as you want, so long as there is enough corneal tissue to maintain stability.

what's the monovision you are refering to?

See our article about monovision.

is there any other downside for PRK vs lasik other than initial discomfort, higher infection possiility? I read lasik is about 90% of lasik surgery, if PRK is superior for long term, why don't more people opt for PRK.

Lasik provides nearly instant results with virtually no pain. PRK provides slow vision recovery with discomfort. Considering that Lasik is so successful in the vast majority of cases and the long-term advantage of PRK is relatively small, it is not surprising that PRK is less popular.

[michaelscai]

I'm thinking of PRK over lasik - no flap, same results for near sightedness, less intrusive, less dry eye?

Is PRK patient less prone to dry eye because it's less intrusive to the cornea compare to lasik?

[LasikExpert]

It is generally believed that the deeper into the cornea that tissue is disturbed, the greater the probability of dry eye issues because nerves are being disrupted deeper.

You have already had Lasik and you would have experienced whatever dry eye problems Lasik would create, so you know what you could expect if you were to have Lasik enhancement instead of PRK on the Lasik flap.

[michaelscai]

Is PRK easier for enhancement as well if enhancement is needed at a later time? since no flap to lift again??

Also, I'm readying about this LASEK which is a modified form of PRK, is there any point of going with LASEK vs PRK? so confusing

[LasikExpert]

Is PRK easier for enhancement as well if enhancement is needed at a later time? since no flap to lift again??

"Easier" is a relative term. PRK on the Lasik flap is probably easier for the surgeon, but your vision recovery will be slower with PRK than with a Lasik enhancement. It may not be possible to do PRK on the Lasik flap if the flap is too small or too thin. Your surgeon can measure flap thickness before a final recommendation. As a (very) general rule, PRK is on the surface and does not require lifting the flap. That is likely to be less traumatic to the eye, but the removal of the epithelium makes for slower vision recovery.

Also, I'm readying about this LASEK which is a modified form of PRK, is there any point of going with LASEK vs PRK? so confusing

My personal opinion is that LASEK is unnecessary. There is no proven long-term advantage to LASEK over PRK. The original purpose of LASEK was to reduce the probability of corneal haze, but that is resolved nearly completely with the use of Mitomycin C (MMC) during the PRK surgery. If you read LASEK vision recovery you will find that it is a little better than PRK in the first few days, gets worse than PRK at about 2-3 weeks postop, and then ends up taking just a bit longer than PRK to finally resolve. Talk to your surgeon about his/her personal preferences and question why.