I think whether or not LASIK is suitable depends on corneal thickness, corneal steepness, and the level of correction needed, just as a baseline, or so it was explained to me. I was investigating intraocular lenses not too long ago as an alternative because my ophthalmologist advised that I'd probably have difficulty seeing in low-light conditions if I underwent LASIK.
(Apparently my "parameters" are such that I'm in a gray area where some surgeons will perform LASIK, but others won't. My prescription is pretty high in one eye (around -8). I ended up not being a great candidate for any corrective eye surgery, intraocular lenses included.)
Anyway, intraocular lenses are definitely more invasive, but from what I recall they sounded like a better option to me than LASIK in general: apparently vision quality is better than LASIK with IOLs, there's no removal of corneal tissue, and chance for complications was lessened. (Well, as I understood it, there were fewer minor complications, but more possible major complications, which is maybe not a trade-off many people want to make.)
Of course, they cost about 2x as much as LASIK.
I'm pretty sure they are FDA approved, especially given their use in cataract surgery, although the ones in cataract surgery replace the natural lens whereas the corrective type typically do not...
Well I think that's where I was going with this. Cataract patients get their lenses replaced regularly and the surgery appears to be a much lower risk than before. A relative of mine, during his cataract surgery, even had the option to get a corrective factor put into the new lens.
(Apparently my "parameters" are such that I'm in a gray area where some surgeons will perform LASIK, but others won't. My prescription is pretty high in one eye (around -8). I ended up not being a great candidate for any corrective eye surgery, intraocular lenses included.)
Anyway, intraocular lenses are definitely more invasive, but from what I recall they sounded like a better option to me than LASIK in general: apparently vision quality is better than LASIK with IOLs, there's no removal of corneal tissue, and chance for complications was lessened. (Well, as I understood it, there were fewer minor complications, but more possible major complications, which is maybe not a trade-off many people want to make.)
Of course, they cost about 2x as much as LASIK.
I'm pretty sure they are FDA approved, especially given their use in cataract surgery, although the ones in cataract surgery replace the natural lens whereas the corrective type typically do not...