intralase vs microkeratome

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.

intralase vs microkeratome

Postby bat » Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:56 pm

:?
From across the pond .... I am 42 (nearly) and have myopia of right eye -10.5, left eye -8.5. Both are -2.5 for astigmatism. Corneas are 525, left, 550, right. Pupils around 5.3/5.5. I have a possible option of lasik with intralase with one company but another company with very good reviews especially at these parameters does not use intralase, but a microkeratome. Apparently the surgeon is very experienced and claims to be able to cut just as thin a flap, and as precise, with the blade. Everyone says intralase is good but also that the surgeon really counts. Both are approximate in price. What do you guys think?
While I'm here across the pond, the other option suggested is refractive lens exchange, which seems rather invasive, has good results, but also seems to carry a risk of retinal detachment. Any advice - I don't want to rush into things andsurgery and still be dependent on glasses, for reading and driving maybe, but not elsewhere.
bat
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:58 pm
Location: UK

Postby Mikewas+4 » Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:48 pm

Hello bat; You've got some very big decisions to make. Take all the time you need to be confident with your decisions. Don't be faithful to what 1 doctor tells you, get a 2nd, 3rd and even more opinions before you make a decision.

As for the microkeratome vs intralase, with your cornea thickness it seems like either would be fine as long as the doctor is skilled. I just had Lasik last week (45 Y/O+4.25 in both eyes and slight astigmatism. over 500 cornea thickness) and before I went in for my surgery I watched the patient before me have his procedure done using a microkeratome and it went smooth. I chose intralase because I feel it lessens the risk.

From what I understand, there seems to be more consistency with the intralase and a thinner cut. From a business perspective Intralase cost at least $300 to $500 per eye, here in my area so I would think that that alone would make the doctor lean toward performing the Intralase.

If I had a doctor make a claim to me that he is as precise as the intralase I would think he's a little arrogant.

Like I mentioned earlier do your footwork. Get a 2nd,3rd, and at least a 4th consultation.

Keep us posted; Mike
Mikewas+4
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 12:49 am

intralase vs microkeratome

Postby bat » Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:54 pm

Thanks Mike
I've had two consultations now. One turned me down flat and wouldn't even give me my results or properly explain why and the other afterwards suggested it might be possible, but insists I have an IOL consultation first before they will even show my results to their surgeon. The place recommended to me has a consultation process where you always see the surgeon, I was sceptical (and will still ask) re their views on the microkeratome but they back it up in evidence cited. They also have a very personal approach and both a high success rate and a very low re-treatment rate. Have posted on forums here and have found no one with negative results with this guy and hes highly trained, both here and abroad. I think as you say it pays to have several consultations.

I hope you are recovering well from your surgery, being not the best thing for me I will be disappointed but thats all. Will keep you guys informed!
bat
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:58 pm
Location: UK


Return to Thinking About It

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests