Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (Trans-PRK), laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) are three mainstay refractive surgeries worldwide. The applicability, efficacy, safety, and predictability of these different techniques are quite similar. Trans-PRK has the strongest biostability, earliest return to normal corneal sensitivity but the longest recovery time, most uncomfortable postoperative experience, and possibility of corneal haze. LASIK possesses the fastest visual rehabilitation but the slowest corneal nerve reinnervation, and flap displacement is possibly lifelong. SMILE incurs no flap-related complications and has intermediate vision recovery time and biomechanics compared with Trans-PRK and LASIK. However, it lacks the cyclotorsion-compensation system, eye-tracking system, and customized treatment profile for high astigmatism or irregular corneal surface. This review aims to introduce the mechanisms, pros, and cons of these three types of refractive surgery. With full understanding, practitioners could advise patients on the most suitable treatment of choice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2021 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: