The nightly contacts that were featured earlier as a viable LASIK alternative actually has a scientific name behind it. Just like how LASIK is actually Laser Assisted In-Situ Keratomileusis, these contacts come under the “cool” name of orthokeratology. Previously, I referred to these contacts according to their brands, e.g. Paragon Corneal Refractive Therapy (CRT) and Vision Shaping Treatment (VST), so it’s nice to know I won’t have to do that any more.

Anyway, the real news I was supposed to report about in this post is the ongoing clinical testing of the LASIK alternative in Japan. So far, a couple of interesting discoveries have been noted. For one, there tends to be great differences in the corrective effects of the contacts depending on the individual. Secondly, the contacts work better on people with less serious vision problems.

Hmm. Sounds a lot like LASIK. But at least the contacts aren’t as destructive on the eye if they fail.

[News via The Sydney Morning Herald]

If you’ve been following this blog, you would have heard about the Epi-K Advanced Surface Treatment - the cutting-edge LASIK procedure that completely removes the need for flap-cutting. But for most eye doctors out there, Epi-K is nothing more than a novelty, and flap-cutting is a norm.

This could actually deter quite a few prospective LASIK patients that just can’t stand the idea of having a flap being cut. But with the recent announcement that IntraLase has released an even faster laser for flap-cutting, I’m sure such patients will have less to worry about. The new IntraLase FS laser is twice as fast as its predecessor, and thus, shaves off around 15 seconds from the entire flap-cutting procedure; reducing the amount of time patients are stuck in an uncomfortable position.

However, the microkeratome is still a much faster option, with trained eye doctors taking only three to six seconds to cut a flap using the blade. But the microkeratome shaves off more tissue compared to the IntraLase laser, and cannot be manipulated as easily. So, I’d recommend going with the IntraLase laser, especially the new and improved one, if your eye doctor offers a choice.

[News via OC Register]

LASIK eye correction surgery can certainly cure myopia by reshaping the cornea. But if both you and your wife have always been victims of a strong case of myopia, even after both of you undergo LASIK, your children could still very well inherit it as genetics actually play a large role in myopia.

But that really isn’t a problem in today’s modern eye correction landscape, where LASIK and its various alternatives are relatively accessible to even middle-class households. Of course, I don’t mean that you should put your child through LASIK. LASIK does require you to be old enough. However, your child could very well undergo LASIK (or an alternative) himself/herself when he/she is old enough.

[News via Long Island Press]

Hello, and welcome back to Lasik World. As we announced in the old blog, Lasik World switched over to WordPress (which you should be seeing now), due to problems with the is-there.com domain, as well as the recurring problems with Movable Type.

Those who have subscribed to the feed should not experience any difficulties as the feed URL remains the same (i.e. through FeedBurner).

Furthermore, a basic theme will be used until the final WordPress theme is rolled in.

Last but not least, we apologize for any difficulties faced, and sincerely thank all of you for your patience and support.

Earlier this week, I featured Lens Replacement Surgery (LRS) - a surgical treatment used to treat lens disorders. So, when a NBC 4 article came out on presbyopia, and how LASIK cannot do anything about it (since LASIK treats corneal problems, and not lens problems), I figured that we could use it to remind everybody about not only presbyopia, but also two effective means of handling it – the Lens Replacement Surgery procedure we discussed earlier and the Presview Sceral Implant procedure highlighted in the NBC 4 article.

According to the article, presbyopia is an inevitable outcome of age, where your eye muscles degrade to the extent that it can no longer “pull on the tiny lens”. At this stage, you could go with the PresView Scleral Spacing procedure featured in the article. This procedure involves putting four tiny plastic implants - each the size of a grain of rice – into the eye. These implants will provide “…the muscles a lever so they can squeeze again.”

But given that this is an invasive surgical procedure, you could as easily go with Lens Replacement Surgery (LRS), which is also invasive. LRS also involves implants, such as those from brands like ReSTOR®, ReZoom™ & Crystalens™. These implants are known as Multifocal Lens Implants.

Overall though, I have no preference for either procedure as there is little evidence to suggest that one procedure is better than the other. Perhaps the main difference I can see at the moment is that the PresView Sceral Spacing procedure makes four incisions while LRS makes only one. However, since both procedures claim almost equal recovery time, the larger number of incisions from the PresView procedure might not mean anything at all.

[News via NBC 4]

We actually already have an article on this non-surgical treatment program, but I guess there is little harm featuring it again. What we’re talking about here is Corneal Refractive Therapy (CRT), where two brands have been approved: Paragon CRT and Vision Shaping Treatment (VST) by Bausch & Lomb.

In this article, WOWT reiterates the simple concepts behind the treatment. When you put on the contacts, it actually flattens the front surface of the eye. If you put it on at night, the process is generally completed by morning – providing you crystal clear (comparable to post-LASIK) vision throughout the day. However, the benefits last only around a day, after which you will have to put on the contacts again.

Basically, this means that you’ll have to wear these CRT or VST contacts every night in order to keep your perfect eyesight. Personally, I feel it’s a hassle, especially with the US$1,500 price tag attached to just two sets of the lenses. Moreover, you’ll have to replace one set of contacts every year. But I suppose this is a effective solution for those who either do not qualify for LASIK eye correction surgery or just cannot bring themselves to commit to invasive surgery.

For more information on these contacts, visit Lasik World’s older (and more detailed) post on them.

[News via WOWT]

According to a recent press release by a New York eye surgeon, the ReSTOR® Lens Replacement Surgery has a 95% success (in correction) rate – on par at least, with any competing eye correction surgical procedure, e.g. LASIK eye correction surgery. But before we go any further with this statistic, let’s delve into the basics of Lens Replacement Surgery. What is Lens Replacement Surgery? What does it solve? Is it a LASIK alternative or a complement? How safe is it?

Well, Lens Replacement Surgery (LRS) is a surgical procedure aimed at treating lens problems, such as presbyopia, unlike LASIK which attempts to treat corneal problems. However, it does involve one major procedural similarity with LASIK. Like LASIK, it requires an incision to be made at the outer edge of a patient’s cornea. As a result, LRS cannot claim to be flap-free.

Once the incision is made though, Lens Replacement Surgery is a different animal altogether. A microscopic device is inserted to remove your natural crystalline lens, and replace it with a Multifocal Lens Implant from brands like ReSTOR®, ReZoom™ & Crystalens™. But while the surgical procedure is common among the different brands, the technology involved is different. Each brand has its own optical design, with its own strengths and weaknesses.

Safety-wise, Lens Replacement Surgery is almost similar to LASIK, though LASIK advocates would point to the fact that Lens Replacement Surgery is far less established compared to LASIK. Most eye doctors providing Lens Replacement Surgery have only around one year’s worth of experience (since LRS is a relatively new procedure).

More importantly, it should be noted that Lens Replacement Surgery is generally a complement to LASIK, rather than an alternative, given that LASIK treats corneal problems while Lens Replacement Surgery treats lens problems. But considering that lens problems tend to occur among the older generation, where LASIK is not targeted for, Lens Replacement Surgery seems to be neither a complement nor an alternative, but a lone solution.

[News via eMediaWire]

This must be one of the weirdest pieces of news I’ll ever report on. Anyway, let me get back to the point. Recently, a guy (Ryan Phillips-Page) proposed to his girlfriend during a post-LASIK eye exam. Yes, it was a made-for-tv moment as reporters and photographers were all over the exam room.

For your information, the LASIK eye correction surgery was a present from Ryan to his girlfriend in the first place. But the likelihood of it being a setup since pre-op is low, at least in my humble opinion.

[News via Asbury Park Press] 

The recently released results of the Wall Street Journal Online/Harris Interactive Health-Care Poll provide some interesting results (relative to any sort of LASIK news you’d normally read at least).

For one, we’re told that the percentage of Americans that underwent LASIK eye correction surgery has increased marginally from 2% in 2004 to 3% in 2005. This is part of an increasing trend of people undergoing invasive surgery (5% to 7%), despite the prevalent risks. As prospective LASIK patients should already know, even LASIK comes with potential complications. This blog has highlighted a few LASIK failure stories already.

More importantly, the data also shows (somewhat) that LASIK has become more mainstream as a medical solution, rather than just a “rich man’s toy”, as there was an increase of 4% (from 8% to 12%) of patients undergoing LASIK for medical reasons.

Overall, I can draw a few conclusions. Firstly, it is clear that LASIK is still experiencing growth - albeit at a pace much slower than before. Secondly, we will most likely be seeing LASIK’s transition from a luxury-class procedure to a well-accepted medical solution for eye problems in the near future.

[News via Harris Interactive]

We’ve heard about bladeless LASIK eye correction surgery as an alternative to traditional LASIK which requires the use of a blade - called a microkeratome - to cut a flap in the cornea to allow the correcting laser (excimer laser) to reshape the eye. But even this bladeless procedure requires the use of a laser, such as Intralase, to create the flap. What if you want to avoid flap-cutting altogether?

This is where Epi-K Advanced Surface Treatment is supposed to come in. The procedure avoids cutting a flap, and instead, completely removes just the thin upper layer of the cornea - known as the epithelium.

The upside of this procedure? Lower risk of flap complications (where most LASIK complications tend to occur), lower risk of post-operative surgical complications, decreased likelihood of post-operative dry eye syndrome, and increased ability in treating thin corneas as approximately 35% less corneal tissue is removed.

However, not everything is bright and joyous with Epi-K. It does come with a downside: Longer healing time since the whole epithelium is removed (as opposed to just a flap, which is restored post-correction). Instead of just one day of recovery time, Epi-K necessitates patients to rest for around 3 days.

But if the safety benefits of Epi-K are not exaggerated, then the increased recovery time is undoubtedly a small price to pay.

[News via PRWeb]