Electromechanical reshaping, an alternative to laser eye surgery
Excitement and High-Level Promise
- Many commenters are enthusiastic about electromechanical reshaping (EMR) as a less invasive, potentially reversible alternative to LASIK, especially if it works on living tissue long-term.
- People are also excited about non-vision uses (e.g., cartilage, deviated septum, cosmetic nose reshaping).
Permanence vs Ortho-K and “Braces for Eyes”
- EMR is compared to orthokeratology (Ortho-K) “night lenses” that mechanically reshape the cornea overnight; effects typically last a day or two and are reversible.
- Several users report mixed Ortho‑K results: some get full-day or multi-day correction, others experience halos, short duration, and discomfort.
- EMR is also likened to an “electrochemical Ortho-K” or an eye equivalent of dental braces that could make reshaping more permanent without cutting.
Naming, Perception, and Fear Factor
- Some find the current name off-putting, but note LASIK is also scary if you spell out what actually happens.
- Previous branding like “molecular surgery” is seen as more palatable.
Comparison to LASIK, PRK, SMILE, ICL, and Other Options
- Detailed discussion of current refractive surgeries:
- LASIK: flap creation severs corneal nerves; associated more with dry eye and flap-related concerns than with the actual laser ablation.
- PRK / Trans‑PRK: no flap, epithelium regrows; often less long-term dry eye but recovery is slower and can be extremely painful for days. Some report lasting dry eye or regression; others are very satisfied.
- SMILE: promising blend of benefits but more expensive and with less long-term data.
- ICL and lens exchange: used for very high prescriptions or presbyopia/cataracts; reversible in some cases but lenses can’t yet “accommodate” like natural ones.
- Intrastromal corneal rings and crosslinking mentioned as niche or keratoconus-related options.
Side Effects, Risks, and Patient Experiences
- Halos, glare, and dry eye are recurring themes after LASIK/PRK; some improve over years, others persist.
- Several cautionary stories: severe PRK pain, regression to needing glasses again, retinal detachment and cataract complications, and anxiety about flap adhesion in LASIK.
- Others report excellent long-term outcomes and would repeat surgery, framing risks as acceptable versus daily dependency on glasses/contacts.
Eligibility and Unmet Needs
- Multiple people are ineligible for LASIK/PRK (thin corneas, keratoconus, extreme myopia) and see EMR as especially promising for them.
- Keratoconus patients and those with night-vision issues (halos, glare, astigmatism) are particularly hopeful but note it’s unclear from the thread whether EMR will address these problems.
Aging, Presbyopia, and Expectations
- Discussion that laser surgery isn’t ideal once presbyopia sets in, because lens aging still requires reading glasses later.
- Lens exchange at cataract time (or electively) is presented as the current definitive fix for age-related lens problems, though with trade-offs in focusing ability.
Skepticism, Funding, and Industry Impact
- Some express distrust of new eye tech given existing complications, advising to wait for long-term, independent data.
- Others joke about funding gaps (“take my money”) and speculate that the eyewear industry won’t welcome EMR.
Lifestyle and Non-Surgical Ideas
- One commenter claims past generations “fixed” eyesight by outdoor focusing, which is strongly challenged as scientifically unfounded for structural refractive errors.
- Ortho-K, vision exercises, AR/VR or large screens are discussed as non-surgical ways to reduce eye strain, though their ability to truly “correct” vision is disputed.