LASEK vs PRK: How the Two Surface Laser Techniques Differ and Why Surgeons Pick One

The consultation is almost over when the surgeon says something unexpected. LASIK, the procedure everyone in the waiting room seems to be talking about, is not the right fit for this pair of corneas. There are two other options, and their names sound like a typo of each other. The patient nods, writes down four letters and then three, and spends the drive home wondering whether she has just been offered two different operations or the same one twice.

She is not alone in that confusion. Ask ten people who wear glasses what the lasek vs prk difference is, and most will guess it has something to do with the laser. It does not. The laser step is essentially identical. What separates the two procedures is a decision about a layer of cells roughly as thick as a sheet of plastic wrap, and what the surgeon chooses to do with it.

That small decision shapes the first week of recovery, the risk profile, and the reasons a particular surgeon reaches for one technique over the other. This explainer walks through all of it, grounded in what published evidence actually shows rather than what advertising implies.

What is the LASEK vs PRK difference in plain language?

Start with the word both procedures share: surface. In LASIK, a surgeon creates a hinged flap of corneal tissue, lifts it, fires the laser underneath, and folds the flap back down. Surface procedures skip the flap entirely. The laser works directly on the front surface of the cornea once the outermost layer has been moved out of the way.

That outermost layer is the corneal epithelium: a living sheet of cells, about five or six cells deep, that renews itself constantly, much like the surface of your skin. It sits on top of a thick, clear layer of collagen called the stroma, which is where the laser does its reshaping work. To reach the stroma, the epithelium has to go somewhere.

PRK, or photorefractive keratectomy, removes it. The surgeon gently clears the epithelium from the treatment zone using a soft brush, a blunt instrument, a diluted alcohol solution, or in some versions the laser itself. The laser then reshapes the stroma, and over the following days the surrounding epithelium migrates inward and regrows across the treated area, according to MedlinePlus.

LASEK, or laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy, keeps it. A small well is placed on the eye and filled with dilute alcohol for a short period, which loosens the epithelium so it can be rolled aside in one piece. After the laser step, the surgeon floats that sheet back into position, where it serves as a biological dressing while new cells replace it underneath.

So the lasek vs prk difference comes down to one question: is the original epithelium discarded or preserved? Everything else that differs between the two, from comfort in the first days to the way surgeons talk about haze, flows from that single choice.

How surface laser eye surgery actually works, step by step

Picture the cornea as a clear, domed window at the front of the eye. Its curvature does most of the eye’s focusing. If the dome is too steep for the length of the eye, light focuses in front of the retina and distant objects blur: nearsightedness. Too flat, and the reverse happens. Astigmatism means the dome is shaped more like the side of a rugby ball than a basketball, so light bends unevenly.

An excimer laser corrects this by vaporizing microscopic amounts of stromal tissue in a precisely calculated pattern. It does not burn or cut; it breaks molecular bonds with pulses of ultraviolet light, removing tissue in fractions of a micron per pulse. To flatten a nearsighted cornea, more tissue is removed from the center. To steepen a farsighted one, more is removed from the periphery, per the Mayo Clinic overview of refractive surgery.

On the day itself, whether the procedure is LASEK or PRK, the sequence usually runs like this. Anesthetic drops numb the eye. A small device holds the eyelids open. The surgeon prepares the epithelium by the method already described. The patient fixates on a target light while the laser tracks tiny eye movements and delivers its programmed pattern, typically over a matter of seconds. A medicated contact lens is then placed on the eye as a protective bandage, and drops are started.

The whole visit is short, and the laser portion is measured in seconds rather than minutes. What patients remember most is not the laser but the sensation afterward, once the anesthetic fades. That is where the two techniques begin to feel different, and it is the reason the epithelium question deserves the attention it gets.

Where the epithelium goes: the one detail that separates LASEK from PRK

Think of the epithelium as living wallpaper. PRK strips the wallpaper and lets the wall regrow its own. LASEK peels the wallpaper back carefully, works on the wall, and smooths the original sheet back on.

The logic behind LASEK, when it was developed, was appealing. An intact sheet of the patient’s own cells laid over a freshly lasered surface should, in theory, reduce pain, speed the return of a smooth optical surface, and shield the healing stroma from the inflammatory signals that drive haze. The cells in that sheet are not expected to survive long term; they are replaced from beneath over days. Their job is to act as a temporary bandage.

The counterargument, which many surgeons find persuasive, is that the alcohol used to loosen the sheet is itself a mild irritant to the underlying tissue, and that a sheet of partly devitalized cells may not behave much better than no sheet at all. Modern PRK has also changed. Transepithelial PRK uses the laser to remove the epithelium in the same pass as the treatment, avoiding both brushes and alcohol. That blurs the historical line between the two approaches.

A third relative, epi-LASIK, uses a blunt mechanical separator instead of alcohol to lift the epithelial sheet, aiming for the LASEK benefit without the chemical step. The NHS groups these approaches together as surface laser treatments because, from the patient’s point of view, they share the same core feature: no stromal flap, a healing surface, and a first week that asks for patience.

What the best-quality evidence says about whether preserving the sheet actually helps is covered in the safety section below. The short version is that the theoretical advantage has been harder to prove in trials than its inventors hoped.

Who is usually offered surface ablation instead of LASIK, and who is asked to wait

Surgeons do not offer LASEK or PRK because they are second best. They offer them because a flap is either unwise or unwanted for a particular pair of eyes.

The commonest reason is corneal thickness. A LASIK flap uses up tissue, and every diopter of correction consumes more. When measurements suggest the remaining bed would be thinner than the surgeon is comfortable with, surface treatment preserves that margin. Corneal shape matters too. Subtle irregularities on mapping scans, or a family history of keratoconus (a condition in which the cornea progressively thins and bulges), often push a surgeon toward surface ablation or away from laser surgery altogether.

Occupation and lifestyle enter the conversation. People who box, play contact sports, or work in environments where a blow to the eye is plausible are often counselled toward flapless surgery, since there is no flap to dislodge. Dry eye that is already troublesome is another consideration; some surgeons believe surface treatment disturbs fewer corneal nerves, though evidence on this is mixed and individual.

Who is asked to wait? The NHS notes that laser eye surgery is not usually offered to people under 21, because prescriptions are still changing, and that a stable prescription for at least two years is generally expected. Pregnancy and breastfeeding temporarily alter corneal shape and are usual reasons to postpone. Uncontrolled diabetes, active eye infection or inflammation, certain autoimmune conditions, and any sign of progressive corneal disease may lead a surgeon to defer or decline.

None of these are checkboxes a patient can tick alone. Screening involves measurements of corneal thickness and topography, pupil size in dim light, tear film quality and a detailed examination. The treating team weighs them together, and the final call on whether surface ablation is suitable, and which variant, rests with them.

LASEK vs PRK difference at a glance

Words can only carry so much of a comparison. Here is the same information arranged side by side, with LASIK added as a familiar reference point. Every entry describes typical practice or the direction of published evidence, not a guarantee for any individual eye.

Feature	PRK	LASEK	LASIK (for reference)
Flap created	No	No	Yes, hinged stromal flap
Fate of epithelium	Removed and regrows	Loosened with dilute alcohol, folded aside, replaced	Stays attached to flap
Laser step	Excimer on stroma	Excimer on stroma	Excimer on stroma beneath flap
Bandage contact lens	Usually, several days	Usually, several days	Rarely
Early discomfort	Moderate for the first few days	Moderate; trials find little consistent difference	Usually mild
Visual recovery	Gradual over days to weeks	Gradual over days to weeks	Typically faster
Haze risk	Present, especially at higher corrections	Present; no clear difference shown in trials	Very low
Flap-related complications	None possible	None possible	Possible, uncommon
Suitability for thinner corneas	Often preferred	Often preferred	May be unsuitable

Two rows deserve emphasis. First, the laser step is the same in all three columns; the refractive correction itself is not what differs. Second, look at how many PRK and LASEK cells read almost identically. A Cochrane systematic review comparing the two for nearsightedness found no clear difference in visual outcomes, safety or haze, and graded the underlying evidence as low quality, according to PubMed. That finding sits behind much of what follows.

PRK vs LASEK recovery time: what the first days and weeks usually look like

Recovery from surface ablation is honest work. It does not happen overnight, and anyone promising crisp vision the next morning is describing LASIK, not this.

The first two to four days are the hardest. Once the anesthetic drops wear off, most people describe a gritty, burning sensation, watering, and sensitivity to light. This is the period when the epithelium is regrowing across the treated zone under the bandage contact lens. MedlinePlus describes vision after PRK as blurry for the first few days while this happens. Sunglasses indoors, a darkened room, and the lubricating and anti-inflammatory drops prescribed by the surgical team are the standard toolkit. Decisions about which drops and for how long belong to that team.

Around day three to five, the surgeon typically removes the bandage lens once the surface has closed. Vision often improves noticeably at this point, though it tends to fluctuate through the day and from one day to the next. Many people can return to desk work within a week, though screen time may feel tiring, and driving should wait until the treating team confirms vision meets the legal standard.

Over the following weeks, the new epithelium smooths and the stroma settles. The NHS notes that it can take several weeks or months for vision to fully stabilize after laser eye surgery. Swimming, eye makeup, and dusty environments are usually restricted for a period the surgeon will specify.

Does LASEK shorten any of this? The intent was that a replaced epithelial sheet would ease the first days. Trial evidence, including the Cochrane review cited above, has not consistently shown a meaningful difference in pain or speed of visual recovery between the two. Individual surgeons may still observe differences in their own hands, which is a legitimate part of how they choose.

Is LASEK safer than PRK? What the evidence actually shows

It is a fair question, and the honest answer is less dramatic than internet forums suggest: on current evidence, neither has been shown to be safer than the other.

The most rigorous attempt to answer it is the Cochrane systematic review of randomized trials comparing LASEK with PRK for nearsightedness, indexed on PubMed. The reviewers pooled trials that measured uncorrected vision, loss of best-corrected vision, accuracy of the final prescription, corneal haze, and pain. Across those outcomes they found no clear difference between the techniques. They also rated the evidence as low quality, largely because the trials were small and varied in how they measured things.

Low-quality evidence of no difference is not the same as proof of equivalence. It means that if a real difference exists, it is probably modest, and the studies done so far were not powerful enough to pin it down. That is the kind of uncertainty patients deserve to hear plainly, rather than a confident claim in either direction.

What both procedures share is a safety profile shaped by the absence of a flap. Complications that are specific to LASIK, such as flap wrinkles, incomplete flaps, or epithelial cells growing under the flap, cannot occur. In exchange, surface procedures carry a slower, more exposed healing period during which infection, delayed epithelial closure, and haze are the main concerns. The Mayo Clinic lists dry eye, glare, halos, under- or over-correction, and regression as risks across refractive laser procedures generally.

When someone asks whether LASEK is safer than PRK, the more useful reframing is: which technique does this surgeon perform most often, with the equipment and drop regimen they know best? Familiarity is a safety variable that no trial fully captures.

LASEK vs PRK haze: what it is and why the alcohol step matters

Haze deserves its own section because it is the complication most specific to surface ablation, and the one LASEK was partly invented to prevent.

Corneal haze is a faint cloudiness in the front of the stroma that develops during healing. It is not scarring in the everyday sense. When the epithelium is disturbed and the stroma beneath is reshaped, the wound-healing response can prompt cells in the stroma to produce disorganized collagen and to change into a more active, less transparent form. If that response is exuberant, the healed area scatters light. Mild haze is common in the first weeks and usually fades. Significant haze can reduce vision quality, cause glare, and occasionally push the prescription back toward where it started.

Several factors raise the risk. Larger corrections, because more tissue is removed. Ultraviolet exposure during healing, which is why surgeons are firm about sunglasses. Slow epithelial healing, which leaves the stroma exposed to inflammatory signals for longer. Surgeons commonly apply an antimetabolite agent to the corneal surface during the procedure for higher corrections to dampen this response; that is a clinical decision, and its use and duration are the surgeon’s to determine.

The LASEK hypothesis was that an intact epithelial sheet would shield the stroma from those signals and reduce haze. The dilute alcohol used to loosen the sheet complicates the picture, since alcohol itself can stress the tissue beneath. When the Cochrane reviewers looked specifically at haze at follow-up, they found no clear difference between LASEK and PRK, again with low-quality evidence, per PubMed.

For a patient, the practical takeaway is that haze prevention depends less on which acronym is on the consent form and more on the size of the correction, protection from sunlight, prompt healing, and following the drop schedule the team prescribes.

Why does the military prefer PRK over LASIK? The PRK vs LASIK military question

This question turns up constantly, and the answer is a useful window into how risk is weighed in the real world.

Armed forces around the world have long favored surface ablation for personnel in combat, aviation, and special operations roles. The reasoning is mechanical rather than optical. A LASIK flap, even years after surgery, remains a plane of weakness in the cornea. It heals at its edges but never fully fuses across its surface in the way undisturbed tissue does. In ordinary civilian life that rarely matters. In an environment where blunt trauma to the face, blast overpressure, or ejection from an aircraft are foreseeable, a flap that could shift or tear is a liability that a flapless cornea does not carry.

Surface procedures also avoid the question of what happens to a flap under rapid pressure changes at altitude or in diving, and they preserve more corneal thickness, which some military eye services regard as a margin of safety for long service careers.

Two caveats are needed for accuracy. First, many military services now also approve LASIK, particularly modern versions with thinner, laser-created flaps, after studies of their own personnel found good results. The preference for PRK is historical and role-dependent rather than absolute. Second, the military rationale does not automatically transfer to everyone. The trade-off they accept, a slower and more uncomfortable recovery in exchange for structural robustness, is sensible for a paratrooper and may be unnecessary for an office worker.

Within that military context, PRK has generally been chosen over LASEK for a simple reason: it is procedurally simpler, does not depend on the alcohol step, and, as discussed above, has not been shown to produce worse outcomes. That same logic drives many civilian surgeons toward PRK today.

What is the failure rate of PRK? A more honest way to ask the question

People searching this phrase usually want a single percentage. There is not one, and any article that offers one without a named source is guessing. Failure is not a defined clinical endpoint in refractive surgery; several distinct things can fall short, and each is measured differently.

Under-correction or over-correction means the laser removed slightly less or more tissue than planned, or the eye healed differently than predicted, leaving a residual prescription. This is more likely with larger corrections. Regression describes an eye that reached its target early and then drifted partly back over months as the cornea remodeled. Both are sometimes addressed with a second, smaller treatment once the eye is stable, if the surgeon judges the cornea suitable. Whether and when that is offered is entirely the treating team’s decision.

Loss of best-corrected vision is the outcome that matters most. It means the eye cannot see as well with glasses after surgery as it could before, usually because of haze, irregular healing, or an irregular surface. This is uncommon but is the metric trials use to define harm.

Then there are quality-of-vision complaints that do not show up on an eye chart: glare, halos around lights at night, starbursts, and dry eye. The Mayo Clinic lists all of these as recognized risks of laser refractive surgery. For many people they fade over months; for a minority they persist.

The NHS describes serious complications of laser eye surgery as uncommon, while making clear that no procedure is risk-free. A better question to bring to a consultation than the failure rate is: for my prescription, my corneal thickness and my age, what outcome range do you see in your own audited results, and how often do your patients need an enhancement?

How surgeons actually decide between LASEK and PRK

Given that trials find so little separating them, why does one surgeon perform LASEK almost exclusively while another has not done one in years? The answer says a lot about how surgical medicine works in practice.

Training and habit carry real weight, and not in a lazy way. A surgeon who has performed one technique hundreds of times knows exactly how their patients’ eyes look on day one, day three and day seven. They recognize when healing is off track. That pattern recognition is itself a safety feature, and it is rational to keep using the method that generates it.

Equipment shapes the choice as well. Transepithelial PRK, in which the laser removes the epithelium and reshapes the stroma in one continuous pass, requires a platform programmed for it. Where that is available, some surgeons have abandoned both the alcohol step of LASEK and the manual scraping of traditional PRK, reasoning that a no-touch approach minimizes variables.

Patient-specific factors still tip the balance. A very loose or fragile epithelium, sometimes seen in people with a history of recurrent corneal erosions or certain dystrophies, may argue against trying to preserve it as a sheet. A cornea that has already had surgery, or one with an irregular surface, may lead a surgeon to prefer removing the epithelium fully so the laser works on a cleaner canvas.

Some surgeons continue to believe, from their own experience, that LASEK gives their patients a more comfortable first two days. Others believe the alcohol step adds irritation for no measurable gain. Both views are defensible within the current evidence, which is why the honest answer to the lasek vs prk difference in outcomes is often: in this surgeon’s hands, with this equipment, for this cornea. Patients are entitled to ask exactly that, and a good team will explain their reasoning without defensiveness.

What people often get wrong about LASEK and PRK

Myths cluster around surface laser surgery because it sits in the shadow of its better-known sibling. Here are the ones that most often lead people astray.

Surface ablation is the budget or old-fashioned option. PRK predates LASIK, which is true, but the excimer laser, the eye tracking, and the treatment profiles used today are the same modern technology in both. Surgeons choose surface treatment for corneal reasons, not as a fallback.

LASEK is a minor variation of LASIK. The names are one letter apart, and that has caused genuine confusion at consultations. LASEK has no stromal flap. It is far closer to PRK than to LASIK, and it recovers like PRK.

The results are worse than LASIK. For suitable eyes, the final visual outcome is not what separates the procedures; the speed of getting there is. The NHS describes the different laser techniques as having broadly similar results for appropriate candidates, with differences mainly in recovery and suitability.

Once the bandage lens is out, recovery is over. The surface has closed at that point, but vision often continues to shift for weeks as the epithelium smooths and the stroma settles. Judging the outcome at day five is premature.

Haze means the operation failed. Mild, transient haze in the early weeks is a normal part of surface healing for many people and typically fades. It is persistent, vision-reducing haze that concerns surgeons, and that is what the sunglasses and drop schedule are designed to minimize.

Laser surgery stops the eye from changing. The cornea is reshaped, but the lens inside the eye continues to age. Reading glasses in midlife arrive on their usual schedule, and cataracts form as they would have anyway. Refractive surgery treats a prescription; it does not freeze time.

Questions to ask your care team before choosing LASEK or PRK

A good consultation is a conversation, and the most useful questions are the ones that reveal how a particular surgeon thinks rather than the ones that fish for reassurance. Consider bringing these.

• Why are you recommending surface treatment for my eyes rather than a flap procedure? Which measurement drove that?
• Which surface technique do you perform most often, and why did you settle on it?
• How will the epithelium be handled in my case: removed, lifted and replaced, or removed by the laser itself?
• Given my prescription, do you plan to use any additional measure during surgery to reduce the risk of haze, and what does that involve?
• What will my vision realistically be like on day one, day three, one week and one month? What would tell you healing is off track?
• How long will I need to avoid driving, screen-heavy work, swimming and dusty environments?
• What is your policy if I end up under-corrected or my prescription drifts back? When would an enhancement be considered, and when would you advise against one?
• How will my dry eye be assessed before and after, and what is the plan if it worsens?
• Who do I call out of hours if something feels wrong, and what symptoms should prompt that call?
• Can you share your own audited outcomes for people with a prescription like mine, including how often best-corrected vision is lost?

Notice that none of these ask the surgeon to promise a result. They ask for reasoning, contingency plans and data. The Cleveland Clinic and other patient-education sources encourage exactly this kind of preparation, because the decision about which technique to use, and whether to operate at all, rests with the treating team, and the patient’s job is to understand it well enough to consent with confidence.

When to call your doctor after LASEK or PRK

Some discomfort in the first few days after surface laser surgery is expected: grittiness, watering, light sensitivity and blurred vision that comes and goes. Certain symptoms are not part of normal healing and need a same-day call to the surgical team, or urgent care if the team cannot be reached.

• Pain that is severe, escalating, or not eased by the measures the team advised, especially if it worsens after initially improving.
• A sudden drop in vision, or vision that was improving and then becomes markedly worse.
• Increasing redness, thick or colored discharge, or swelling of the eyelids, which can signal infection.
• A white or grey spot visible on the cornea, or a sense that the surface has become cloudy.
• The bandage contact lens has fallen out, shifted, or feels as though it is scratching, before the scheduled removal.
• New flashes of light, a shower of floaters, or a curtain or shadow across part of the vision.
• Any injury to the operated eye, even a minor knock, during the healing period.
• Fever or feeling generally unwell alongside eye symptoms.

Infection after surface ablation is uncommon but is the complication surgeons fear most, because the protective epithelium is open in the first days. Early treatment changes the outcome, which is why teams would far rather take a call that turns out to be nothing than miss one that mattered. MedlinePlus and the Mayo Clinic both stress keeping every scheduled follow-up appointment even when the eye feels fine, since some problems, including early haze and delayed healing, are visible to the examiner before they are noticeable to the patient.

Never remove the bandage lens yourself, never rub the eye, and never adjust or stop prescribed drops without speaking to the team. Every decision about the healing eye, including whether a symptom is worrying, belongs with the surgeon who knows what that eye looked like on the operating table.

Frequently asked questions

Is LASEK safer than PRK?

Current evidence does not show either to be safer. A Cochrane systematic review pooling randomized trials found no clear difference between LASEK and PRK in loss of best-corrected vision, haze, or accuracy of correction, and graded the evidence low quality. Both avoid flap-related complications entirely. The more meaningful safety factor is usually the surgeon’s experience with a particular technique and their equipment, which is a fair question to ask directly.

Which is safer, LASIK or LASEK?

They trade one set of risks for another rather than one being safer overall. LASIK carries a small risk of flap complications and leaves a permanent plane in the cornea, but recovers quickly. LASEK has no flap, so those risks vanish, but the open surface heals more slowly and carries a small risk of infection, delayed healing and haze. Suitability depends on corneal thickness, shape, and lifestyle, which the treating team assesses.

Is PRK or LASIK more risky?

Neither is inherently riskier; the risks are different in kind. PRK’s main concerns are a slower, more uncomfortable first week, a brief window of infection risk while the epithelium regrows, and haze at higher corrections. LASIK’s concerns center on the flap, which can wrinkle, tear or shift, and on dry eye. For someone with a thin cornea or a high-trauma job, PRK is usually considered the lower-risk choice; for many others, LASIK is offered.

What is the PRK vs LASEK recovery time?

Both typically follow the same arc. Vision is blurry and the eye uncomfortable for the first few days while the surface heals under a bandage contact lens, which is usually removed around day three to five. Many people return to desk work within a week, and the NHS notes vision can take several weeks or months to fully stabilize. Trials have not shown a consistent difference in recovery speed between the two techniques.

Why does the military prefer PRK over LASIK?

Because a flapless cornea has no structural plane of weakness. A LASIK flap heals at its edges but never fully fuses across its surface, so in roles involving blast, blunt trauma, ejection, altitude or diving, PRK’s intact cornea has been considered more robust. Many services now also approve modern LASIK after studying their own personnel, so the preference is historical and role-specific rather than absolute.

What is the failure rate of PRK?

There is no single failure rate, because several distinct outcomes can fall short: under- or over-correction, regression over months, loss of best-corrected vision from haze or irregular healing, and quality-of-vision complaints such as glare and halos. The NHS describes serious complications of laser eye surgery as uncommon. A more useful question for a consultation is what the surgeon’s own audited results show for prescriptions like yours.

Does LASEK vs PRK haze risk differ?

Not clearly. LASEK was designed partly to reduce haze by shielding the stroma with the patient’s own epithelial sheet, but the Cochrane review found no clear difference in haze between the two, with low-quality evidence. Haze risk is driven more by the size of the correction, ultraviolet exposure during healing, and how quickly the surface closes. Surgeons may apply an additional agent during surgery for higher corrections; that is their clinical decision.

Does PRK hurt more than LASEK?

Both involve moderate discomfort for the first two to four days, typically described as grittiness, burning, watering and light sensitivity. The theory behind LASEK was that replacing the epithelium would ease this, but randomized trials have not consistently confirmed a meaningful difference in pain. Individual experience varies widely, and the drops and comfort measures prescribed by the surgical team, plus dark glasses and rest, are the same for either technique.

Can I have LASEK or PRK if my cornea is too thin for LASIK?

Often, yes, which is one of the commonest reasons surface treatment is recommended. Because no flap is created, surface ablation preserves more corneal tissue, leaving a larger residual bed after the correction. That said, there is still a lower limit, and corneas that are both thin and irregularly shaped may not be suitable for any laser procedure. Detailed thickness and topography measurements guide the treating team’s decision.

Will I still need reading glasses after surface laser surgery?

Very likely, in time. LASEK and PRK reshape the cornea to treat distance prescriptions, but they do not alter the lens inside the eye, which stiffens with age and causes presbyopia, the need for reading glasses in midlife. Some people choose a deliberate small difference between eyes to delay this, a strategy the surgeon may discuss. Cataracts also develop on their usual timetable regardless of prior laser surgery.

References

• MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia: LASIK eye surgery
• NHS: Laser eye surgery and lens surgery

This article is for general information only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Please consult a qualified doctor about your individual situation.