Classification of Techniques in Refractive Surgery

The second approach: sticking to similarities in the surgical procedure seems most obvious in first sight. Similar procedures need similar instruments. However, often this connection is only an historical accident, showing the creative origin of a new technique, for instance, the birth of a new idea in correcting ametropia by a kind of accidental mutation is such case. The third approach, following surgical intention of change, is the most systematic one. Here, techniques of the same category will have similar (principal) complications or defects. If techniques of the same categorisation do have different kind of complications, it will then be a sign that one of the techniques is fairly undeveloped and at investigational stage. Its side effects are most likely due to the kind of instrumentation used.

Classifying refractive corneal procedures by any of these three approaches will bring similar clusters and only some of the techniques will change the cluster. However, classification is somewhat setting the horizon and the way of thinking in the refractive surgical world. Following a prospective future orientation, the classification by similar surgical intention of change will be most adequate. It helps to point out built-in complications and automatically reveals complications caused by instrumentation. Moreover, this classification is independent of technology, fascilating quick technology changes.