lasik surgeons

 

USAEyes is a nonprofit Lasik patient advocacy organization
How to Pick
A Lasik Doctor
۰ Certified Lasik Doctor
۰ Why Choose USAEyes
 
Certified Lasik Doctors
۰ 50 Tough Questions For
  Your Lasik Doctor
 
Ask Lasik Expert
۰ Lasik Q&A Forum
 
Lasik
Top Articles
۰ Lasik Results
۰ All About Lasik
۰ Lasik Cost
۰ Wavefront Custom Lasik
۰ Lasik Patient Survey
 
Lasik Alternative
Top Articles
۰ Monovision Lasik
۰ PRK, LASEK, Epi-Lasik
۰ RLE Lens Exchange
 

Digg, Del.icio.us, Reddit, Bookmark, etc. this page.

Add Lasik page to Digg, Del.icio.us, Reddit, My Favorites, Facebook, Ask, and others.

 

Lasik Doctors

 

High Correction With Lasik

Really bad eyesight presents difficult challenges for vision correction surgery.


lasik
Lasik laser eye surgery may not be best for very high correction. Alternatives should be considered.

 

As a (very) general rule, patients with more than about 10.00 diopters of myopia (nearsighted, shortsighted) vision or more than around 3.00 diopters of hyperopia (farsighted, longsighted) vision are significantly less likely to achieve uncorrected vision after conventional or custom wavefront Lasik or All-Laser Lasik that is equal to their corrected vision before surgery. To determine your refractive error, read your prescription.

Patients with greater than about 6.00 diopters of needed correction are at a higher risk of corneal haze if PRK is selected. This elevated risk of corneal haze may be able to be reduced by the use of 500mg of vitamin C taken orally twice a day for one week before surgery and at least two weeks after surgery. Yes, plain old vitamin C. Another technique to reduce the probability of corneal haze is the application of Mitomycin C to the cornea during surgery. Mitomycin C is a strong medicine that is appropriate when needed, but probably should be avoided when possible.

LASEK and Epi-Lasik are techniques developed to provide ablation on the surface of the cornea as in PRK, but with a lower risk of corneal haze. Available studies are inconclusive if this is actually the situation. For the greatest margin of safety, patients needing greater than 6.00 diopters of correction may want to consider Lasik instead of PRK, LASEK, or Epi-Lasik. Lasik has a very low incidence of corneal haze with higher corrections.

Additionally, patients with astigmatism that is greater than half their sphere, or more than 2.00 diopters are less likely to achieve uncorrected vision after Lasik, PRK, LASEK, or Epi-Lasik that is equal to their corrected vision before surgery. All patients with refractive error beyond these guidelines can expect regression and would have a higher probability of a surgical enhancement.

CK is used for correction of hyperopia and to induce monovision. CK appears to have best results when inducing no more than 1.50 to 2.00 diopters of refractive change.

Patients with very high refractive error may find lens-based refractive surgery a better option. P-IOLs appear to be most appropriate for patients with moderately-high to high refractive error. RLE may be appropriate for a patient with any amount of refractive error if that patient is fully presbyopic, or for patients who have accommodation with very high refractive error if the patient is willing to sacrifice accommodation. A significant limitation of both P-IOLs and RLE is that they may not be able to correct astigmatism.

These are guidelines that not every surgery will agree are accurate and there is room for disagreement on the issue. Also, an individual's circumstances may indicate that one procedure is significantly more safe than another regardless of these general guidelines. We are a patient advocacy primarily interested in patients avoiding problems or disappointing outcomes. There are most certainly refractive surgeons less conservative than our organization. It is also possible that due to the unique circumstances of the patient, a parameter not normally considered appropriate would be best. An individual's circumstances may indicate that one procedure is significantly more safe than another regardless of these general guidelines.

If your refractive error is so great that you cannot reasonably expect full correction with refractive surgery, you may consider having surgery with only partial correction. However you first need to consider your motivation for refractive surgery. If the motivation is to never wear glasses again, you already know that this is not probable. In this instance it would appear that you will not receive the outcome you want - not wearing corrective lenses.

You may want to ask your doctor to fit you with contacts or spectacles that will simulate your expected vision after surgery for partial correction. This will provide you with an indication of what life would be like after surgery. Wear these corrective lenses for at least a month before you decide if the expected visual acuity after surgery will meet your needs.

Discuss with your doctor if after surgery you will be able to wear contacts and/or glasses that will correct the remaining refractive error. It is unreasonable to expect that your vision after refractive surgery without corrective lenses will be better than your vision with corrective lenses before surgery.

Don't rush. You have only one set of eyes. If you have doubt that you will reach the goal that is the basis of your personal motivation, you should seriously consider deferring refractive surgery until you and your doctor can reasonably expect a completely satisfactory result.

The most you can expect from refractive surgery is the convenience of a reduced need for corrective lenses. To achieve that convenience, you must accept some risk. While there is risk in any surgery, the risk of surgery outside these general guidelines may be unacceptable for most patients.

If you are ready to choose a doctor to be evaluated for conventional or custom wavefront Lasik, All-Laser Lasik, PRK, LASEK, Epi-Lasik, NearVision CK, RLE, or any refractive surgery procedure, we highly recommend you consider a doctor who has been evaluated and certified by the USAEyes nonprofit organization. Locate a USAEyes Evaluated & Certified Lasik Laser Eye Surgery Doctor.

If this article did not fully answer your questions, use our free Ask Lasik Expert patient forum.


Current High Correction Lasik Medical Journal News...

Toric implantable collamer lens for patients with moderate to severe myopic astigmatism: 12-month follow-up.

Related Articles

Toric implantable collamer lens for patients with moderate to severe myopic astigmatism: 12-month follow-up.

Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2010 Mar 2;

Authors: Bhikoo R, Rayner S, Gray T

Abstract Purpose: To report on the 12-month follow-up of 77 eyes with moderate to high myopic astigmatism implanted with toric implantable collamer lenses (ICLs). Methods: Retrospective case-note review of 77 eyes from 42 patients undergoing toric ICL placement by one surgeon. Preoperative mean spherical equivalent -2.50 dioptres (D) to -15.00 D myopia and 1.00 D to 7.00 D astigmatism. Results: At 12 months, mean manifest refractive cylinder (MRC) decreased 81% from 2.38 D to 0.44 D. MRC within 1.00 D occurred in 99% (76/77) of eyes, whereas 86% (66/77) had MRC within 0.75 D. 99% (76/77) had postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) better than or equal to preoperative values, whereas 78% (60/77) gained up to one line BCVA and 1% (1/77) lost one line BCVA. Uncorrected binocular vision of 6/6 or better occurred in 90% (38/42) of patients compared with binocular BCVA of 6/6 or better in 67% (28/42) preoperatively. One ICL was replaced due to low vaulting. Two eyes with astigmatism of 3.25 D and 3.50 D received subsequent laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) to reduce residual small refractive errors. Indications for ICL were: myopia too high for LASIK (73%), cornea too thin for LASIK (44%) and contact lens intolerance (33%). Night halos were reported in 10% (8/77) of eyes at 12 months. One ICL was removed due to unrecognized preoperative glaucoma. There were no cases of cataract formation, or endophthalmitis. Conclusion: This study is the largest reported series of toric ICL implantation in New Zealand. It supports the safety, efficacy and predictability of toric ICLs to treat myopic astigmatism.

PMID: 20584028 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

 

Technorati Tags: ,

Last updated Monday, April 12, 2010

"Consider and Choose With Confidence" TM

A few of the communities where Lasik doctors are certified by USAEyes :

Materials presented in this website are for informational purposes only and are not medical advice. See full Terms of Use.
Unless otherwise indicated, Copyright 1997-2010 © Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance, a nonprofit organization.
8543 Everglade Drive, Sacramento CA 95826-3616, USA, 800/USA-Eyes
No images, graphics, or text may be reproduced in any media without express written permission.
USAEyes, CRSQA, ComplicatedEyes, Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance,
50 Tough Questions For Your Lasik Doctor, and Consider and Choose With Confidence are trademarks of the
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
All Rights Reserved.