And what this means for you
At ELS, every claim about safety, effectiveness or precision is backed by published peer-reviewed research. Below you’ll find key studies that support each treatment we offer, along with easy-to-read summaries.
These are key representative studies, not an exhaustive list. If you’d like further information, we can point you in the right direction. And you can ask our optometrists and surgeons for personalised advice.
| Treatment | Study | What was tested | Key findings | DOI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Link from: LASIK PRK Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | LASIK / PRK | Dirani et al. / Melbourne Excimer Laser Group. Long-term refractive outcomes and stability after excimer laser surgery (2–13-year follow-up) (2010) | Long-term myopia correction study of eyes treated with PRK and LASIK. | Both PRK and LASIK showed effective refractive correction long term. LASIK had somewhat better stability. | DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.04.041 |
| Link from: LASIK PRK Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | PRK / LASIK | Alió JL, Ortiz D, Muftuoglu O, Garcia MJ. Ten years after PRK and LASIK for moderate to high myopia (2009) | 34 PRK eyes vs 34 LASIK eyes in 10-year matched study. | After 10 years, 71 % of PRK and 88 % of LASIK were within ±1.00 D. Neither group lost more than two lines of best-corrected vision. Re-treatment rate higher for PRK. | DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2007.131748 |
| Link from: LASIK PRK Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | LASIK vs PRK | Castro-Luna G, Jimenez-Rodriguez C, Perez-Rueda A, Alaskar-Alani H Long Term Follow-Up Safety and Effectiveness of Myopia Refractive Surgery (2020) | Study tracking long-term safety, effectiveness, predictability in 509 PRK eyes and 310 FS-LASIK eyes over 10 years. | Both techniques showed excellent safety and effectiveness. FS-LASIK had slightly better safety and predictability indices | DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17238729 |
| Link from: SMILE LASIK PRK Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | PRK/LASIK/SMILE | Taneri S, Knepper J, Ros A, Dick HB. Long-term outcomes of PRK, LASIK and SMILE (2022) | Review of 15 long-term studies: 4 on PRK (666 eyes), 7 on LASIK (566 eyes), 5 on SMILE (188 eyes). Minimum follow-ups≥10 years for PRL/LASIK and ≥5 years for SMILE. | Across all three procedures, long-term safety was excellent and late complications were rare. Some mild regression occurred in higher prescriptions but was not clinically significant for most patients. SMILE outcomes were comparable to PRK and LASIK, with no clear superiority between techniques. | DOI: 10.1007/s00347-021-01449-7 |
| Link from: SMILE LASIK Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | SMILE vs LASIK | Zhou X, Han T, et al. Long-term stability of the effective optical zone after SMILE and FS-LASIK (2023) | 72 eyes (SMILE 36, LASIK 36), follow-up at 3 years and 7 years post-surgery. | In this 7-year comparative study, both SMILE and LASIK achieved excellent long-term stability and vision quality. The area of clear vision remained constant in both groups, with no significant late regression. SMILE showed slightly better corneal shape preservation and stability, while LASIK retained equally strong accuracy | DOI: 10/1186/s12886-024-03662-9 |
| Link from: SMILE ICL | ICL vs SMILE | Luo W et al. Four-year visual outcomes and optical quality of SMILE and EVO-ICL (2023) | High myopia patients who had SMILE or ICL, followed for 4 years. | Both treatments were safe and effective long term. ICL had less induced optical aberrations; SMILE had slightly better predictability | DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03050-9 |
| Link from: SMILE ICL | EVO-ICL | Packer M. The Implantable Collamer Lens with a central port: review of the literature (2018) | Literature review, 67 clinical reports, >4, 196 eyes | The EVO ICL (with central port) shows excellent safety (reduced cataract, blocking risk) and effective refractive results across many published cases. | DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S188785 |
| Link from: ICL Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | EVO-ICL | Packer M. Evo ICL for Moderate Myopia (2022) | FDA clinical trial, 20 eyes -3.00 to -6.00 D | 91.5% of eyes landed within ±0.50 D of target after 6 months; no major safety issues reported (e.g. IOP, cataract) | DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S393422 |
| Link from ICL page Shortsight Longsight Astigmatism | ICL – Immediate Sequential Bilateral Surgery | Russo A, et al. Immediate Sequential Bilateral Implantable collamer Lens Surgery is safe and Effective (2024) | Evaluated 254 patients (508 eyes) who underwent bilateral ICL implantation in the same session. | In a cohort of 508 eyes receiving bilateral ICL in the same session, vision was stable over 3 years with low complication rates. Authors highlight that vault prediction and planning for the second eye are key factors when surgeries are done sequentially rather than staged but that same-day bilateral ICL surgery yielded good safety and effectiveness at 3 years. | DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20240326-01 |
| Link from: Presbyond Presbyopia | PRESBYOND Laser Blended Vision | Fu D, Aruma A, Xu Y, Han T, Xia F, Zhou XT. Refractive outcomes and optical quality of PRESBYOND laser-blended vision for presbyopia correction (2022) | 20 patients, 1-year follow up after PRESBYOND LVC | Most eyes maintained or gained lines of distance vision. Binocular distance and near uncorrected acuities improved significantly. All patients were satisfied. | DOI: 10.18240/ljo.2022.10.16 |
| Link from: Presbyond Presbyopia | PRESBYOND Laser Blended Vision | Ganesh S, Brar S, Gautam M, Sriprakash K. Visual and refractive outcomes following laser blended vision using non-linear aspheric micro-monovision (2020) | A retrospective review of myopic & hyperopic presbyopes treated with PRESBYOND LVC. | Demonstrated stable and satisfactory visual outcomes in both myopic and hyperopic presbyopes using the MEL 90 laser. | DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20200407-02 |
| Link from: Presbyond Presbyopia | PRESBYOND Laser Blended Vision | Van Heerden A, Birgirimana D. Visual and Refractive Outcomes After Treatment with PRESBYOND Laser Blended Vision for Myopic and Hyperopic Presbyopia (2025) | Retrospective study of 116 patients (232 eyes: 170 hyperopic, 62 myopic) treated bilaterally with PRESBYOND LASIK using MEL-90 excimer and VisuMax femtosecond lasers. Minimum 3-month follow-up | Both myopic and hyperopic presbyopes achieved excellent binocular distance and near vision after surgery. For hyperopic eyes, 96.5% were within ±1.00 D of target and over 90% saw 20/20 or better at distance. For myopic eyes, 96.8% were within ±1.00 D of target and saw 20/20 or better at distance. Almost all patients could read comfortably at near (N8 or better). No major safety issues were reported. | DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20250805-04 |
| Link from: Cataract IOL | Cataract surgery | Khan MA, et al. Cataract surgery outcomes in Australia and New Zealand: A retrospective study of outcomes in 5018 cases and review of literature (2023) | Evaluated the outcomes of 5,108 eyes treated with cataract surgery tracked over 3 years including trainee cases. | Vision improved from an average of 6/48 pre-op to around 6/12 one-month post-op. Complication rates were low and comparable to international benchmarks, confirming modern cataract surgery’s high safety and predictability | DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2024-001765 |
| Link from Cataract IOL | Cataract surgery | Monestam E, Long-term outcome of cataract surgery: 20-year results from a population-based prospective study (2019) | Population-based cohort followed for two decades post-surgery | Cataract surgery offered excellent long-term visual rehabilitation for the majority, especially younger patients, after 20 years, with a low requirement for ND:YAG laser capsulotomy, confirming the durability of modern lens implants | DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.07.026 |
| Link from | Treatment | Study | What was tested | Key findings | DOI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LASIK / PRK / Shortsight / Longsight / Astigmatism | LASIK / PRK | Dirani et al. / Melbourne Excimer Laser Group. Long-term refractive outcomes and stability after excimer laser surgery (2–13-year follow-up) (2010) | Long-term myopia correction study of eyes treated with PRK and LASIK. | Both PRK and LASIK showed effective refractive correction long term. LASIK had somewhat better stability. | 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.04.041 |
| LASIK / PRK / Shortsight / Longsight / Astigmatism | PRK / LASIK | Alió JL, Ortiz D, Muftuoglu O, Garcia MJ. Ten years after PRK and LASIK for moderate to high myopia (2009) | 34 PRK eyes vs 34 LASIK eyes in 10-year matched study. | After 10 years, 71% of PRK and 88% of LASIK were within ±1.00 D. Neither group lost more than two lines of best-corrected vision. Re-treatment rate higher for PRK. | 10.1136/bjo.2007.131748 |
| LASIK / PRK / Shortsight / Longsight / Astigmatism | LASIK vs PRK | Castro-Luna G, Jimenez-Rodriguez C, Perez-Rueda A, Alaskar-Alani H. Long-Term Follow-Up Safety and Effectiveness of Myopia Refractive Surgery (2020) | Study tracking long-term safety, effectiveness, predictability in 509 PRK eyes and 310 FS-LASIK eyes over 10 years. | Both techniques showed excellent safety and effectiveness. FS-LASIK had slightly better safety and predictability indices. | 10.3390/ijerph17238729 |
| SMILE / LASIK / PRK / Shortsight / Longsight / Astigmatism | PRK / LASIK / SMILE | Taneri S, Knepper J, Ros A, Dick HB. Long-term outcomes of PRK, LASIK and SMILE (2022) | Review of 15 long-term studies: PRK (666 eyes), LASIK (566 eyes), SMILE (188 eyes). Minimum follow-up ≥10 years for PRK/LASIK and ≥5 years for SMILE. | Across all three procedures, long-term safety was excellent and late complications were rare. Mild regression in higher prescriptions but not clinically significant. | 10.1007/s00347-021-01449-7 |
| SMILE / LASIK / Shortsight / Longsight / Astigmatism | SMILE vs LASIK | Zhou X, Han T, et al. Long-term stability of the effective optical zone after SMILE and FS-LASIK (2023) | 72 eyes (SMILE 36, LASIK 36), follow-up at 3 and 7 years post-surgery. | Both SMILE and LASIK achieved excellent long-term stability. SMILE showed better corneal shape preservation, LASIK had equal accuracy. | 10.1186/s12886-024-03662-9 |
| SMILE / ICL | ICL vs SMILE | Luo W et al. Four-year visual outcomes and optical quality of SMILE and EVO-ICL (2023) | High myopia patients who had SMILE or ICL, followed for 4 years. | Both treatments were safe and effective. ICL had less induced optical aberrations; SMILE had slightly better predictability. | 10.1186/s12886-023-03050-9 |
| ICL / Shortsight / Longsight / Astigmatism | EVO-ICL | Packer M. Evo ICL for Moderate Myopia (2022) | FDA clinical trial, 20 eyes (-3.00 to -6.00 D) | 91.5% of eyes within ±0.50 D of target after 6 months. No major safety issues (IOP, cataract). | 10.2147/OPTH.S393422 |
| Presbyond Presbyopia | PRESBYOND Laser Blended Vision | Fu D, Aruma A, Xu Y, Han T, Xia F, Zhou XT. Refractive outcomes and optical quality of PRESBYOND laser-blended vision for presbyopia correction (2022) | 20 patients, 1-year follow up after PRESBYOND LVC. | Most eyes maintained or gained lines of distance vision. Binocular and near acuity improved significantly. All patients satisfied. | 10.18240/ljo.2022.10.16 |
| Cataract IOL | Cataract Surgery | Monestam E. Long-term outcome of cataract surgery: 20-year results from a population-based prospective study (2019) | Population-based cohort followed for 20 years post-surgery. | Cataract surgery offered excellent long-term rehabilitation and durability of modern lens implants. | 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.07.026 |
At ELS, we’re committed to clarity – in both vision and information. Our team continuously reviews emerging research and technology to ensure the treatment we recommend for you is based on the strongest available evidence.
To understand how this research relates to your own vision goals, we’re here to help. Book an assessment or get in touch for individualised advice.
