LASIK vs. PRK

in his response to a recent post, Dr. Oyakawa suggested to the poster that PRK might be a better option than LASIK because of dry eye.  I found this quite interesting.  The literature seems to suggest that LASIK may sever some of the nerves that facilitate tear production, and that PRK may not be as as problematic in that respect.  I also have read that PRK is often used in place of LASIK for those patients who have thin corneas.

Other than a slightly longer recovery period, are there any other disadvantages to PRK?  On the surface, at least, it would seem preferable to LASIK in that there is no corneal flap necessary.  Rather, the epithelium is removed and discarded prior to the sculpting of the cornea, and afterward the epithelium is regenerated.

[John C Hagan III, MD, FACS, FAAO]

Two different issues. No one will argue that PRK allows more correction of myopia for thin corneas or high myopia.

There may be some studies about dry eyes and PRK/LASIK, apparently you have already read them.  Both are done with caution or not at all in severe dry eyes.

PRK is generally more painful-uncomfortable. The cornea can come in with defects, erosions, uneven, etc.

If you wish to ask Dr. O please post you question on an even day.

JCH MD

[John C Hagan III, MD, FACS, FAAO]

Two different issues. No one will argue that PRK allows more correction of myopia for thin corneas or high myopia.

There may be some studies about dry eyes and PRK/LASIK, apparently you have already read them.  Both are done with caution or not at all in severe dry eyes.

PRK is generally more painful-uncomfortable. The cornea can come in with defects, erosions, uneven, etc.

If you wish to ask Dr. O please post you question on an even day.

JCH MD

[cwatt1]

Thanks much.  Just curiosity on my part.

[John C Hagan III, MD, FACS, FAAO]

-