LASIK Results at LA Sight

by David A. Wallace MD and Sima Tabanfar OD
Updated October, 2015

The most important thing anyone interested in LASIK wants to know is, “What results can I expect from treatment?”. LA Sight publishes a statistical review of our visual outcomes on a roughly annual basis.  We invite other surgeons and laser centers to analyze and publish their results. In that way, we can learn from, and help each other. Ultimately, this kind of candid disclosure and public accountability serves the interests of our profession and all patients seeking our care.

When I talk with any prospective client seeking vision correction, I try to qualify my own use of statistics as follows:

  1. I am inherently skeptical about anyone who uses statistics in speaking to me. They are usually trying to sell me something.
  2. Statistics are designed to analyze trends in a population or a group. They should not be used to predict future results in individual cases. For example, if the incidence of serious complications in LASIK is 1 in a million, that is extremely low for the overall population. But if you are that 1 case, then for you the complication rate is 100%.
  3. Regrettably, some people use statistics to distort or misrepresent the truth, typically to their advantage. Do not base any decision, especially a surgical one, on statistics alone. Be sure to obtain additional qualifying or “vetting” information.  See our Finding a Good LASIK Surgeon page, for instance, discussing other qualifications to seek and facts to investigate. 
  4. Laser correction for nearsightedness (myopia) is significantly different from correction for farsightedness (hyperopia).  The shape and pattern of laser sculpting is different, and the long-term stability is different.  We describe this on a page discussing Farsightedness Treatment Concerns.  Therefore, it makes more sense to us to present outcomes data for near- and farsightedness separately.  That's why there are two separate tables below.

Visual Acuity Results Treating Nearsightedness

(with or without astigmatism)

 

 Eyes

 %

Cumulative
Eyes
Cumulative
%
Total # Treated

 715

 

715

100%

Follow-Up Data Available

715

 100

715

100%

20/15 or better

 190

 26.6

190

26.6%

20/20 or better

472

 66.0

662

92.6%

20/25 or better

46

6.5

708

99.1%

20/30

 6

0.8

714

99.8%

20/40 or worse

1

0.1%

715

100%

Visual Acuity Results Treating Farsightedness

(with or without astigmatism)

 

 Eyes

 %

Cumulative
Eyes
Cumulative
%
Total # Treated

 35

  35 100%
Follow-Up Data Available

35

 100.0

35 100%
20/15 or better

 0

 0.0

0 0.0%
20/20 or better

 26

 74.3

25 74.3%
20/25 or better

6

17.1

31 91.4%
20/30

 2

 5.7

33 97.1%
20/40

 1

 2.86

35 100%

The information below may clarify or additionally explain the results in the table above.

  • The current retrospective review analyzed all eyes treated in calendar year 2014.  A total of 715 eyes were included in the data analysis.  Some eyes were excluded from analysis for one of three reasons: (1) The targeted goal of treatment was monovision (clear at near range) and therefore unaided distance acuity is not an appropriate measurement of outcome; (2) Some eyes did not have 20/20 correctable visual acuity before treatment, so did not have the potential to recover 20/20 (or better) acuity after treatment; or (3) Some eyes had received prior vision-correcting surgery including RK, PRK, LASIK or IOL surgery; these eyes were excluded.  
  • In the nearsighted series of 715eyes, for which follow-up data is available on all (100%), 26.6% achieved 20/15 acuity, and 92.6% achieved 20/20 or better vision.  This includes eyes that received enhancement care.
  • In the farsighted series of 35 eyes, for which follow-up date is available on all (100%), 74.3% of eyes achieved 20/20 vision.   Eyes in the current study that did not achieve 20/20 uncorrected acuity may be awaiting enhancement care, or these patients may be very comfortable with their current level of vision.  Loss of 1 or even 2 lines of best-corrected visual acuity is, though, a recognized consequence of farsighted laser treatment.
  • This retrospective review covered the period January 2014 through December 2014.  Patients with less than 6 weeks of follow-up data were excluded.
  • This review included patients treated with all ranges of myopia (up to about -9.00 D in this series) and all ranges of astigmatism (up to about -6.00 D in this series).

Take a look at our great reviews and then schedule your consultation