Deciding on the vision correction procedure that’s right for you is an important one. Let the table below show you how the different options compare and ask your eye care professional about the details.

Quality of Vision
Visian ICL
LASIK
PRK
High definition vision
Excellent
Good
Good
Clarity of vision
Excellent
Good
Good
Contrast
Excellent
Good
Good
Night vision
Excellent (1)
24% reported
a reduction (2)
Over 16% reported
a reduction (3)
Predictable outcomes
Highly predictable (1)
Less predictable with
higher vision correction (4)
Less predictable with higher vision correction (5)

Patient Experience
Visian ICL
LASIK
PRK
Outpatient procedure
Yes
Yes
Yes
15-20 minute surgery
Yes
Yes
Yes
Local anesthesia
Yes
Yes
Yes
Minimally invasive
Yes,
3 mm opening
Yes, 7-9.5mm
corneal flap
Yes
The “Wow” of immediate
visual acuity
Yes
Yes
Blurry fluctuating vision up to 3 months
1-2 day short recovery time
Yes
Yes, with additional 1-2 weeks for “flap” healing
Delayed visual recovery up to 4 wks.
Contributes to
“Dry Eye”
No
Yes, over 29% report
some occurence (3)
Yes, occurences during the
recovery period

Future Vision Versatility
Visian ICL
LASIK
PRK
Removable
Yes
No, corneal tissue
cannot be replaced
No, corneal tissue
cannot be replaced
Vision correction flexibility
Yes, removability does not
limit future treatment options
Limited if additional
treatments involve
the cornea
Limited if additional
treatments involve
the cornea
UV protection
Yes, blocks 100% of harmful UVA and UVB light (6)
No
No

Patient Types
Visian ICL
LASIK
PRK
Mild to moderate nearsightedness
Yes
Yes
Yes
High nearsightedness
Yes
Limited by corneal
thickness and
pupil size
Limited by corneal
thickness and
pupil size
Thin cornea
Yes
Limited range of nearsighted correction
Limited range of nearsighted correction
Large pupil
Yes
Greater chance of increased unwanted aberrations
Greater chance of increased unwanted aberrations

References
1. UV-absorbing collamer implantable contact lens (ICL) for the correction of myopia. PMA #P030016. Presentation to the Ophthalmic Devices Advisory Panel. October 3, 2003.
2. Hill JC. An informal satisfaction survey of 200 patients after laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. Jul-Aug 2002;18(4):454-459.
3. Jabbur NS, Sakatani K, O’Brien TP. Survey of complica- tions and recommendations for management in dissatisfied patients seeking a consultation after refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. Sept 2004;30(9):1867-1874.
4. Dan Z Reinstein, Jonathan D Carr, William B Threlfall, Randall Cook, Emma Cremonesi, Hugo FS Futton. Multi-center LASIK outcomes in myopia using the Technolas 217C in over 20,000 eyes. ASCRS 2001 Submissions. April 2001:2.
5. Rajan MS, Jaycock P, O’Brart D, Nystrom HH, Marshall J. A long-term study of photorefractive keratectomy; 12-year follow-up. Available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez. Accessed May 2008
6. Data on file: STAAR Surgical Company. ©2008 STAAR® Surgical Company 10-0004-35