Lee MD, et al. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.10.021.

April 04, 2017
1 min read

Better quality of vision with LASIK vs. PRK did not last after 1 month postop


Lee MD, et al. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.10.021.

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact

LASIK offered patients better visual quality at 1 month postop compared with PRK, but the quality of vision was not significantly better at subsequent follow-up visits, according to a study.

Thirty-four patients with myopia underwent LASIK in one eye and PRK in the other eye in a prospective, randomized case series. Researchers compared the quality of vision at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. At baseline, there were no significant differences in quality of vison.

At 1 month, eyes that underwent LASIK had significantly better visual quality compared with eyes that underwent PRK. The PRK eyes had significantly worse clarity at night (P = .0015) and during the day (P = .0013), subjectively worse overall vision (P = .024), worse fluctuation in vision (P = .006) and worse double vision (P = .022) compared with LASIK.

Additionally, PRK eyes with higher preoperative higher-order aberrations had worse daytime and nighttime clarity, plus more vision fluctuation, than LASIK-operated eyes.

However, there were no significant differences in visual quality between LASIK and PRK eyes after 1 month.

“In our study, we found significant differences in all study groups and subgroups at the 1-month postoperative visit but no significant differences 3 months postoperatively. In addition, we found that these differences were greater in eyes with high baseline [higher-order aberrations],” the researchers wrote. – by Robert Linnehan

Disclosure: Lee reports no relevant financial disclosures. Please see the study for all other authors’ relevant financial disclosures.