----------------------------
I guess that is true. However if PVD/floaters is a known risk then like all the other risks that are documented this also deserves to be.
If you accept the risk of damage to your vision and a very small risk of loss of the eye with LASIK then minor risks like increase of floaters or PVD are deemed accepted also.
JCH III MD
Thank you.
Is there an arguement for documenting the potential suction ring risk in the LASIK consent form?
Sometimes you can tell if the vitreous has detached and sometimes you can't. In any case it would make no difference in whether or how a lasik would be performed. A PVD is no "permanent damage to the eye", its a normal aging change that in some people (debatable) may occur ealier than normal due to the suction ring.
JCH III MD
Do LASIK companies check for state of vitreous gel and in general to look for waek spots? Surely this should be made compulsory in order to avoid permanent damage by Suction ring.
PVDs are a normal part of aging. The LASIK may percipitate a PVD in an eye that already has major liquification of the vitreous gel. It will not cause a PVD in an eye that has solid liquid gel.
There are testimonials of PVD occuring shortly after lasik. There are even anedotal stories of retinal detachments following lasik.
There are no studies that show that lasik is so likely to cause RD that it should be avoided.
Remember that lasik is done on eyes that have documented risks of increased RD and PVD so that some of these are coincidental.
I think the risk is very low. Especially if a dilated retina exam is done before and after lasik to pick up weak spots, lattice, holes, tears.
JCH III MD