Would you be happy with this result?

So I got lasik around 3 months ago. The day after I was sad to see that I was not seeing 20/20 and still had quite a bit of astigmatism. I was told it would likely clear up but after it didn't for 2 weeks I didn't have any high hopes that it would. Sure enough it hasn't cleared up at all.

My original prescription is:

OD: -5.25 x -1.25 x 5
OS: -4.75 x -1.75 x 175

I got the best technology (or was told it was the best) which is the femtosecond laser lasik. I have also had fairly bad halo's since the surgery.


Anyway after about a month after my surgery I had to get glasses again. The new prescription is:

OD: -0.25 x -0.75 x 15
OS: 0 x -1.00 x 180

I can somewhat guess and make out the 20/20 line but its very blury. With correction I can read the 20/15 line with no trouble at all very quickly where as the 20/20 line took like 10 seconds per letter to figure out what it was. The Halo's have finally gone down quite a bit but they are still there even after 3 months. My personal eye doctor who recommended the lasik facility I went to said he has never seen a patient have halo's after 3 months...

So basically the Lasik did very little for my Astigmatism. It didn't even reduce it by half.

I use computers through most of the day and enjoy high resolutions screens so I find that in order to be at the same distance I used to use them I basically have to wear glasses now. Also I generally wear glasses while driving as well as it helps to see street signs and stuff better. Can I do both without glasses? Yes but my vision feels *significantly* better with correction.

Long story short is I am not happy at all. This surgery cost $4700 and I am basically wearing glasses again 24/7 3 months later.

Would you guys be happy with this result or am I just being unreasonable? I wasn't expecting to necessarily get 20/15 vision but I was told anything that is not 20/20 these days is usually considered a failure and I am definitely not at 20/20.

Part of the problem might be I have very high visual acuity as I have had 4k displays since 2005 (3840x2400 on a 22 inch LCD) where stuff is super tiny and could always read it just fine with correction and now its not even near doable without correction. About the only benefit so far I have gotten from the lasik is being able to see while showering and not needing my glasses when I play table tennis. So was I simply unreasonable in my expectations or should I be unhappy with this result?

EDIT:

Oh and I was one of those few people who didn't really get dry eyes. Like I did here and there but it was barely a problem for me and only was an issue typically when waking up after sleeping for the first week and that's about it.

You're so lucky! (no dry eye, no 24/7 pain) While 20/20 surgical results are carefully tracked and used to 'prove' the value of such surgery, patient complaints of pain and discomfort are not well tracked at all. What good's 20/20 vision if you went from painfree and glasses, to a life of discomfort and no glasses?

Anyway, the astigmatism ought to have been easily handled these days (I'd see that as a huge issue to be unhappy about, presumably they'd give it another shot under warranty or whatever if you went back). But, I'd worry if that were even within their capability, given your experiences.

Was your pupil diameter measured beforehand? (Those with a large pupil diamenter tend to have 'flaring' / night vision problems of course.)

The equipment if this were it, ought to have managed much better imo:
"Hyperopic LASIK utilizing the topography-guided platform of the 400 Hz Eye-Q Allegretto excimer and a femtosecond laser flap appears to be safe and effective for correction of hyperopia and/or hyperopic astigmatism. The results are impressive for refractive error correction and stability and for improvement of both uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity."

sf

ps. Lasik scares me tremendously (fears of eyepain and that that is not 'tracked' in any studies, at times I've 'dry eye'). My prescription is close to yours, only a bit weaker.

I don't know as far as pupil size goes. They did talk about the flap size and were deciding if it should be a 9 or 9.5 (mm I guess?) and they decided on 9 if I recall. I don't know if that gives you an idea about that.

Basically all I ever heard is that I am an ideal candidate the whole time and how blessed I was with my thick cornea's (650 microns at their thinist and over 700 farther out). Pretty much the only thing I am very unhappy about is the astigmatism. I can live with the halo's especially as they have decreased a lot to the point where its no longer super annoying or noticable watching TV, using the computer or watching a movie. Now its just mostly annoying at night and considering how they have slowly but consistently getting better I don't really have a problem there.

The place I went to has like a lifetime guarantee but honestly I am kind of worried about getting a touchup if they couldn't get things done right the first time. I myself am definitely not happy with the result.

Since you improved from your prelasik vision its better than before right? Near sight and astigmatism both improved. It might improve more.

As long as you have no dry eye and no glare or halos then its an ok result. Sounds like pre lasik the world was pretty blurry without your glasses.

Mine are worse than before lasik in my opinion because now i have starbursts dry eye and astigmatism in one eye and I lost my super magnifier near sight. i can now see near like a normal person which means I can read and what not but I cant see teeny tiny things. Pre lasik i had no starburst no dry eye no astigmatism. The world was a blur without contacts or glasses outside of the very near zone prelasik but the trade off wasnt good. My eyes were similar to yours without the astigmatism. I keep hoping that as the dry eye improves so will the starburst and astigmatism.