I had LASIK 1/31/06.

Just went to my Lasik peeps the other day and here's my Rx:

OD pl -0.75 x171
OS pl -0.75 x032
CR -39 (not sure what this is, the 9 could be a g or q too)

I'm considering enhancement and I appreciate the risks (DLK, epithelial ingrowth, etc.).

Do I understand correctly from that Rx that my eyes are spherically plano (perfect), it's just that I have a -0.75 astigmatism in each eye (at 171 or 32 degrees)?

My vision is good in the day but night is a bit fuzzy with halos (that I'm convinced now will NEVER go away) and especially small pinpoint lights are hard to spatially orient to one point (this must be the slight astigmatism).

My Lasik doctor's advice is to go buy glasses based on the Rx to see if the difference is that dramatic to warrant enhancement risks. I.e., it's up to me. But when I'm in that doctor chair and I'm refracted...the final lenses I peep through at the eye chart...everything looks FLAWLESS...then I take my head away from the refractor and it's blurry a bit, astigmatic...

The doc also informs me I run the risk of coming out of enhancement with WORSE vision than what I come in with.

Lasik is not the science it purports to be.

What's your advice given that I've permanently altered my eye for the worse already...and feel I might as well get it perfect with laser...and NOT with glasses!

I agree with your doc. LASIK is defnitely not the science it purports to be. Many physicians are playing with a new toy that they don't truly understand and they understand even less about some of the complicated outcomes and variation among individuals.

For such a small refraction error, such as yours, I would strongly advise you to avoid the retreatment. Glasses should help with astigmatism, but will probably not alleviate any high order aberrations, which all LAISK procedures induce.

If you had debilitating aberrations and relatively small pupils, perhaps retreatment done by a very experienced surgeon with a high rate of success alleviating aberrations would be a consideration.

I had lasik and PRK done in July of 2004, the PRK eye healed very well adn I can see perfectly out of it. The lasik eye healed with 0.75 astig. which wasn't there prior to surgery. In August of 2005 I had it enhanced and am I ever glad I did. Just like the PRK eye which in my mind is perfect, so, from personal experience I would have it done.

This is the original message poster here again...

These two statements are mutually exclusive and yet LASIK docs tell you both:

1.) the flap heals
2.) the flap can be safely lifted a year or more after surgery

I don't think flaps and the underlying stromal bed are analogous to a yard of dirt where fresh sod is being laid. In sod's case, it eventually sets up roots and to uplift it is quite destructive. While it's functionally pretty safe, apparently LASIK flaps never really "set down roots." It's probably more suction and epithelium that keeps it in place.

My doctor said I may come out of an enhancment worse than when I went in. This is stupid science. I think I'll skip enhancement and use the remaining $ in my flex spending account to purchase some snazzy glasses. At least my vision is good enough that I don't *need* glasses, but it's imperfect enough that I want to correct what little is left.