http://www.ophthalmologymanagement.com/ ... icle=86168

Quote:

In interview after interview, surgeons mentioned serious flap complications as the main reason they've either stopped performing LASIK or are seeking less invasive alternatives.

"We've all had to deal with flap complications. The danger is small, but real," says Marguerite McDonald, M.D., clinical professor of ophthalmology at the Tulane University School of Medicine. "LASIK is a high-stress procedure for surgeons. It's been proven by Dr. Ramon Naranjo-Tackman of Mexico that surgeons' heart rates go way up during the cutting of the flap, and the incidence of PVCs, PAT and short runs of ventricular tachycardia go up as well."

Quote:

"Once we can improve surface ablation to the point at which patients can wake up the next morning and go to work -- and we're just about there with epi-LASIK -- it will be the procedure of choice," asserts Dr. Soloway. "I'm not sure who would need LASIK then, with its problems of dryness, flap complications, ectasia, and the severing of nerves on the cornea."

Quote:

"The LASIK flap has always introduced distortion into the postoperative wavefront, and although those effects are often small, they can be very significant. Wavefront-guided treatments are likely to move surgeons away from LASIK."

http://www.ophmanagement.com/article.aspx?article=86212

Quote:

Dr. Soloway discusses the advantages of not using a microkeratome blade or alcohol. "Ultimately, the surface procedure is safer simply because we are not cutting the flap and whatever kind of biomechanical problems that can occur with that." He adds that an additional option will help patients who have special needs. For example, patients who might be at greater risk of developing dry eye would be good candidates for epi-LASIK due to the procedure's less invasive technique.

http://www.escrs.com/Publications/Eurot ... efront.pdf

Quote:

… combining wavefront sensing with PRK gives patients an excellent quality of vision while avoiding the potential flap and hinge related complications of LASIK procedures”.

“The early results thus far have been very encouraging. With wavefront-guided PRK, the clinical outcomes are excellent and there does not appear to be safety concerns”.

“Wavefront-and topography-guided PRK seems a valuable tool to correct myopia and compound myopic astigmatism. It could be an alternative to LASIK, especially when dealing with thin corneas and it avoids the risk of flap-induced aberrations”…

“I think that there are several clear advantages of surface ablation: there is no concern about flap striae or displacement, no risk of microkeratome-related complications and there is the potential for improved quality of vision with such procedures...

And I remember back in 1998 how they were talking about LASIK being safer than PRK because it didn't affect the Bowman's Layer. What a crock of ....

- Mitch

Mitch,

It's good to hear from you.





This is a pattern with refractive surgeons. The current procedure is safe and effective and wonderful until the next refractive hoax comes along, and then they bash the current one so they can get the next one approved.

In October, 2003 Dr. Stephen Slade made a comment during a phakic IOL meeting, "LASIK, the more LASIK you do, the more trouble you run into."

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/ ... 3991t1.doc

Dr. I Howard Fine wrote this in a letter to the FDA in November, 2001 to endorse the approval of another refractive procedure, conductive keratoplasty:

"As we all know, Lasik transects the cornea nerves, therefore inducing dry eyes in most patients."

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/ ... 3806t1.doc

I like to borrow the phrase "junk heap" of refractive surgeries coined by Ariel Berschadsky in this article printed in the Wall Street Journal:
http://www.lasikinfocenter.net/General% ... resby.html

LASIK will join the junk heap someday. And then doctors will refer to it like they now refer to RK, like a barbaric procedure.

The following is one of my favorites quotes by a former FDA panel member, Dr. Grimmett. (He's one of the good guys.) This exchange took place during a panel meeting in August, 2002 for the approval of Alcon's wavefront platform for LASIK. (For those who don't know what the PERK study is, it looked at the long-term safety and efficacy of RK.)






I also like Dr. Grimmett's "speeding" quote during that same wavefront meeting. He was basically saying that wavefront LASIK induces aberrations -- it does not "treat them" or "reduce them" or "eliminate them" as the hype goes -- it increases them, it induces them. The only benefit is that it induces them less than conventional LASIK.




A corneal specialist told me once that someday the rest of the world will know that we (those of us who believe LASIK is a bad procedure) were right.

LASIK creates Bowman wrinkles in every cornea. There has never been an Artemis scan that didn't demonstrate Bowman's undulations. This can't be good for the optics of the eye.

LASIK harms every eye.

http://www.ophmanagement.com/article.aspx?article=86298

Ophthalmology Management
March, 2005

IntraLase: Changing the LASIK Landscape

The company aims to make its laser-created flaps the new standard of care.

BY JERRY HELZNER, SENIOR EDITOR

Excerpt:

"Surgeons have produced consistently good outcomes using microkeratomes, but they note that cutting the flap with a microkeratome is the part of the procedure that presents the greatest potential for serious complications. Though the danger is small, it is real, and surgeons who've been attached to heart monitors during the surgery have shown increased heart rates during the cutting of the flap, along with PVCs, PAT and short runs of ventricular tachycardia. Some surgeons have even abandoned LASIK in favor of surface ablation procedures because of their concerns about flap complications.
Refractive surgeons report that patients embrace the idea of a bladeless procedure, and in some cases the elimination of the blade can be the key factor in making the decision to have LASIK.
"A blade is the last thing most people want near their eye, which is why many of the 55 million Americans estimated to be eligible for LASIK still wear glasses or contacts," says Michael Gordon, M.D., assistant clinical professor of ophthalmology at the University of California, San Diego."

EyeWorld, April 2007

http://www.eyeworld.org/article.php?sid=3753






Marguerite McDonald, M.D.:


Daniel S. Durrie, M.D.