I think you'll find that over time, as the early adopters dry up, and the hard sells become the new targets, LASIK will be a harder sell than better and better PRK methods. That's what VISX is working on, making their laser's PRK so good that LASIK's "advantages" become irrelevant.
The key is for laser vision correction to become a "no-touch" procedure. The industry will only reach its fullest potential if the most candidates choose LVC, and a very large number will simply refuse to let a surgeon cut a flap when they can get a "no-touch" zap, with the laser even doing the entire epithelial removal like it's done in Vancouver Canada and Honolulu Hawaii.
Why else do you think VISX's S2 FDA approval included "no-touch" marketing? Someone out there is planning to start marketing this method as a competitive advantage over typical "flap and zap" which turns off a lot of people, who will NEVER do it if it involves cutting.
The decline of PRK will be reversed as the technology and methods improve, and may someday replace LASIK. Of course, removing "surgical skill" from the procedure would allow optometrists to do it someday too, wouldn't it? Isn't PRK (especially "no-touch" PRK) simply a controlled abrasion, and not really surgery? That must bother some MD's. After all, the optometrists took the contact lens market away from MD's a long time ago. And a great PRK is largely based on a great refraction... |
