3 ms·

> safer than laser surgery Is this statement backed by peer reviewed science? I could not find anything. When I Google for "safer than laser surgery", 100% o

by throwaway2037 2y ago

> safer than laser surgery Is this statement backed by peer reviewed science? I could not find anything. When I Google for "safer than laser surgery", 100% of the results say that ICL (implantable contact lens) are riskier than laser (LASIK).

otteromkram 2y ago
They probably just mean in terms of reversability; LASIK is obviously permanent, but ICL can be undone. Both procedures are relatively low risk; each has their own set of drawbacks and qualifying conditions (eg - ICL isn't recommended for people who are over 45 years old).
- throwaway2037 2y ago
  > They probably just mean in terms of reversability No, everything I read says the ICL procedure is higher risk than LASIK. The risk is infection after the surgery.
- vl 2y ago
  45 years old is bizarre FDA restriction rationalizing that you might need lens replacement or +glasses soon anyway. Other countries don’t have this limit for ICL.
  - FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago
    Over 45 you would do RLE (refractive lens exchange) which also protects against cataracts... since you are replacing the lens.
    - vl 2y ago
      There are a lot of 45-year olds that won’t need RLE until 65, if ever. Why do they need to travel to Mexico to get ICL instead of doing it in US? Same thing with modern multi-focal RLE lenses. They got approved in US just couple years ago, and people used to go to Tijuana just to get access to them for years before that.
vl 2y ago
It has less side-effects because incision is way smaller.
- jvanderbot 2y ago
  Incision? Ha! I got PRK in which they just ablate the entire eye, it feels like. Took a week to be able to see again. How far we've come.
  - garaetjjte 2y ago
    Isn't PRK safer because there's no permanent flap, instead removing outer layer that can regrow?
    - cosmie 2y ago
      Yes. The flap created for LASIK (and LASIK-like surgeries, such as SMILE or LASEK) heals, but doesn't have the structural integrity that occurs when the epithelium has to fully regrow like for PRK. So that flap becomes a semi-permanent weakness that can be dislocated down the road and cause problems. In general PRK is still considered the safest laser surgery option, but trades off the long-term risk of the epitheium flap for a much longer initial post-op recovery time. With PRK you have to be careful that there's no hazing as the epithelium regrows, but once it's regrown it's as good as it ever was. So for folks with a high risk of future eye injuries, PRK tends to be preferred (or required, in some instances like the special forces).

otteromkram 2y ago

They probably just mean in terms of reversability; LASIK is obviously permanent, but ICL can be undone. Both procedures are relatively low risk; each has their own set of drawbacks and qualifying conditions (eg - ICL isn't recommended for people who are over 45 years old).

throwaway2037 2y ago
> They probably just mean in terms of reversability No, everything I read says the ICL procedure is higher risk than LASIK. The risk is infection after the surgery.
vl 2y ago
45 years old is bizarre FDA restriction rationalizing that you might need lens replacement or +glasses soon anyway. Other countries don’t have this limit for ICL.
- FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago
  Over 45 you would do RLE (refractive lens exchange) which also protects against cataracts... since you are replacing the lens.
  - vl 2y ago
    There are a lot of 45-year olds that won’t need RLE until 65, if ever. Why do they need to travel to Mexico to get ICL instead of doing it in US? Same thing with modern multi-focal RLE lenses. They got approved in US just couple years ago, and people used to go to Tijuana just to get access to them for years before that.

vl 2y ago

It has less side-effects because incision is way smaller.

jvanderbot 2y ago
Incision? Ha! I got PRK in which they just ablate the entire eye, it feels like. Took a week to be able to see again. How far we've come.
- garaetjjte 2y ago
  Isn't PRK safer because there's no permanent flap, instead removing outer layer that can regrow?
  - cosmie 2y ago
    Yes. The flap created for LASIK (and LASIK-like surgeries, such as SMILE or LASEK) heals, but doesn't have the structural integrity that occurs when the epithelium has to fully regrow like for PRK. So that flap becomes a semi-permanent weakness that can be dislocated down the road and cause problems. In general PRK is still considered the safest laser surgery option, but trades off the long-term risk of the epitheium flap for a much longer initial post-op recovery time. With PRK you have to be careful that there's no hazing as the epithelium regrows, but once it's regrown it's as good as it ever was. So for folks with a high risk of future eye injuries, PRK tends to be preferred (or required, in some instances like the special forces).