Laser in situ keratomileusis for residual myopia after photorefractive keratectomy

Abstract

Laser in situ keratomileusis appears to be a safe, effective, and predictable procedure for treating eyes with 0 or low haze with residual myopia after PRK. It is less predictable in eyes with severe haze.

Laser in situ keratomileusis in 2010 – a review

“…Table 3 indicates a standard procedure for LASIK using a mechanical microkeratome 90 . Adjustment is made when using the femtosecond laser.…”

Laser in situ keratomileusis for refractive error after cataract surgery

“…13,19 In contrast, there is only sparse literature supporting the use of LASIK for correction of ametropia following ocular surgery such as phacoemulsification surgery with IOL implantation. 6,8 Laser in situ keratomileusis surgery has also been shown to be effective for other indications such as correction of refractive error following PRK, 9,20,21 radial keratotomy, 22,23 phakic IOL insertion, 7 and retreatment LASIK surgery. [24][25][26][27] In this study, the percentage of patients with UCVA of 20/40 or better in myopic eyes was none preoperatively and 91.7% postoperatively.…”

“…Ablations were completed with either a 6 mm or 6.5 mm optical zone. The LASIK surgery technique used is described in detail in Comaish et al 9 Those eyes experiencing tracking difficulties were not included in this study.…”

“…[6][7][8] LASIK appears to be effective in pseudophakic patients as well as following corneal and other intraocular procedures. [6][7][8][9] This paper presents results assessing the efficacy, stability, and safety of LASIK in treating residual myopic and hyperopic refractive error following cataract surgery.…”

LASIK operations with the Ziemer FEMTO LDV femtosecond laser flap creation after previous photorefractive keratometry or laser‐assisted sub‐epithelial keratomileusis

“…Main reasons for choosing LASIK are a quick recovery and the absence of haze. Previously, in LASIK, corneal flaps have been recreated using various microkeratomes (Comaish et al. 2002; Pitkänen et al.…”