Hi,
I had Lasik in March. Both eyes were nearsighted originally. Both eyes turned out overcorrected. Right eye is now farsighted. My doctor suggests waiting 2 more months and then consider an enhancement.

I am interested in guidance, esp because this comment by Glenn Hagele in another thread caught my eye:
...hyperopic LASIK is significantly different from myopic LASIK and is much less predictable.

1) Does "much less predictable" only mean that it might not turn out perfect, or that there is significant chance of worsening the eye?

The intention was for mono-vision. Left eye intentionally nearsighted for reading but it's overcorrected to 20/25 and seems like a good "distance eye".
2) I assume there is no reason to enhance the left eye? Does it make any sense to try to regress this eye back to nearsightedness for reading?

3) since the first Lasik treatment led to overcorrection, is there reason to expect an enhancement to be an improvement?

I am 55 years old, and am a computer programmer so I do a lot of reading online. With the inability to read, I've only gone from 100% glasses during waking hours to maybe 80% glasses.
Thanks for having this forum!

If your left eye is 20/25 its plano, I would leave that one alone. You can try to make the right eye slightly nearsighted. no point taking a risk on both eyes. At least only one is really overcorrected, the other is plano because it was supposed to be undercorrected. Can you handle mono vision in the other eye instead? Much better to only enhance one eye

>Hi, I had Lasik in March.
>Both eyes were nearsighted originally. Both
>eyes turned out overcorrected. Right eye
>is now farsighted. My doctor suggests
>waiting 2 more months and then
>consider an enhancement.

> I am interested in guidance,
>esp because this comment by Glenn
>Hagele in another thread caught my
>eye:...hyperopic LASIK is significantly different from
>myopic LASIK and is much less
>predictable.
Answeer:
Hyperopic LASIK has a lower range of accuracy than myopic and usually reslults in an overcorretion which fades with time/

> 1) Does "much less predictable" only
>mean that it might not turn
>out perfect, or that there is
>significant chance of worsening the eye?

Answer: very little chance of worsening your eye, no greater risk than the first surgeryl
> The intention was
>for mono-vision. Left eye intentionally nearsighted
>for reading but it's overcorrected to
>20/25 and seems like a good
>"distance eye". 2) I assume
>there is no reason to enhance
>the left eye? Does it make
>any sense to try to regress
>this eye back to nearsightedness for
>reading?
Answer:
I agree to leave it alone. If you want to try chemical regression have your surgeon start you on Acular for a couple of weeks and if you are not becoming more farsighted than add a soft contact lens plus the acular and it should stimulate regression to more myopia.

> 3) since the first Lasik treatment
>led to overcorrection, is there reason
>to expect an enhancement to be
>an improvement?
Answer: most reoperations are very accurate so most likely you will end up with good vision.

> I am 55 years old,
>and am a computer programmer so
>I do a lot of reading
>online. With the inability to read,
>I've only gone from 100% glasses
>during waking hours to maybe 80%
>glasses. Thanks for having this
>forum!

Answer: after your reoperation hopefully you will be much less dependent on glasses. As you can tell, making a near sighted eye farsighted is not good as it is not clear anywhere. Once you get this eye clear you will be much happier with your decision to have LASIK in the first place.

Dr.Salz
Los Ageles

>Hi, I had Lasik in March.
>Both eyes were nearsighted originally. Both
>eyes turned out overcorrected. Right eye
>is now farsighted. My doctor suggests
>waiting 2 more months and then
>consider an enhancement.

> I am interested in guidance,
>esp because this comment by Glenn
>Hagele in another thread caught my
>eye:...hyperopic LASIK is significantly different from
>myopic LASIK and is much less
>predictable.

> 1) Does "much less predictable" only
>mean that it might not turn
>out perfect, or that there is
>significant chance of worsening the eye?
> The intention was
>for mono-vision. Left eye intentionally nearsighted
>for reading but it's overcorrected to
>20/25 and seems like a good
>"distance eye". 2) I assume
>there is no reason to enhance
>the left eye? Does it make
>any sense to try to regress
>this eye back to nearsightedness for
>reading?

> 3) since the first Lasik treatment
>led to overcorrection, is there reason
>to expect an enhancement to be
>an improvement?

> I am 55 years old,
>and am a computer programmer so
>I do a lot of reading
>online. With the inability to read,
>I've only gone from 100% glasses
>during waking hours to maybe 80%
>glasses. Thanks for having this
>forum!

Jim, I am in a similar situation...what did you do for the overcorrection.

thanks,