Comparison of Laser in situ Keratomileusis and Photorefractive Keratectomy for the Correction of Myopia of - 6 . 00 Diopters or Less

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) compared to photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for the correction of low or moderate myopia (-0.50 to-6.00 D) at 6 months after surgery. refractive outcomes of LASIK and PRK were similar. Although flap related complications occurred only after LASIK, the overall risk of loss of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity was not significantly greater than for PRK. A number of well-designed studies have reported the outcomes of surface photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for low myopia (-0.50 to-6.00 diopters [D]). 1-7 However, as yet there are few controlled studies of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for treating this range of myopia and still fewer direct comparisons between the two procedures. 8-11 With increasing assurances regarding the efficacy and safety of LASIK due to better nomo-grams, and improvements in the currently available microkeratomes and surgical technique, this procedure is today considered by many as the technique of choice for correction of myopia greater than-6.00 D. 12-14 Many refractive surgeons also choose LASIK for the treatment of low myopia 15 , therefore it is important to compare the relative outcomes and efficacy of the two procedures. We report the results from a single center of a large consecutive series of LASIK and surface PRK procedures to correct myopia of-6.00 D or less. Patient Characteristics The study population comprised a non-randomized consecutive series of 622 eyes of 392 patients, from which 314 eyes underwent LASIK and 308 eyes had PRK. Because LASIK is a newer procedure than PRK, the PRK procedures tended to be performed earlier in the series than the LASIK procedures. Patients were eligible for inclusion in this study if they were 18 years or older and had given informed consent; had stable myopia ranging from-0.50 to-6.00 D spherical equivalent refraction The authors have no proprietary interest in the materials mentioned herein.