canidate for lasik

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.

canidate for lasik

Postby robpatrawala » Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:31 am

I wanted to get your opinion about my chances for lasik. I was turned down for lasik 6 years ago and told my corneas were to thin and steep.
Recently had two consultation and both thought I was a reasonable candidate for lasik. Right eye is myopia 2.0, astigmatism of 1.25, cornea thickness of 512 and pupil diameter of 6mm. Left eye is myopia 4.0, astigmatism of 1.5, cornea thickness of 520 mm, and pupil diameter of 6.5 mm. Corneal thickness was measured with sometype of ultrasound device which touched the cornea. Although both physicians do surface technigues neither felt it was necesscary. One recommented intralase and both recommended wavefront(ladarvision and visx4). Both are well respected and have worked on football players, musicians, famous people etc.
Why am I a good canidate now and not 6 years ago? Technology?
Do you agree with using intralase and wavefront?
Do there recommendations sound reasonable?
Thanks for providing this valuable resource.
robpatrawala
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:49 pm

Postby LasikExpert » Wed Dec 13, 2006 3:30 am

The recommendations of your doctors do sound reasonable, however with your very low myopia (nearsighted, shortsighted) vision I believe you should consider if PRK, LASEK, or Epi-Lasik may be a better option...or possibly no surgery.

If you are an appropriate candidate for both conventional and wavefront-guided laser ablation, the outcomes for wavefront-guided tend to be a bit better than conventional, however you need to rely on your doctors' advice. You can have wavefront-guided with Lasik, IntraLasik, PRK, LASEK, and Epi-Lasik.

If you are near or past age 40, then you may want to keep that myopia. Visit Sudden Presbyopia for details.
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

Postby robpatrawala » Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:25 pm

Thank you Glenn. Do you believe that intralase is safer than the blade for someone like myself with thin cornea and steep cornea? Also, will ladarvision 4000 result in more tissue removal then if I did not have wavefront?
tx
robpatrawala
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:49 pm

Postby LasikExpert » Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:05 am

The manufacturer of the laser used to create the IntraLasik flap has provided several studies that show the accuracy of the thickness of a flap created with a laser is better than with a mechanical microkeratome, however for many people this difference is not a clinically important point. The laser flap has advantages and disadvantages and the mechanical microkeratome has advantages and disadvantages, all of which depend upon the individual patient.

You will need to rely on the recommendation of a competent doctor on this issue. It may be that one is much more important than the other or that any will do.
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: No registered users and 1 guest

cron