I Am -2.25 Diopter in Nearsightness, Should I Get LASIK?

-2.25 is a very easily treatable prescription. 

A small LASIK treatment like yours generally leads to the swiftest recovery with the fewest complications.  LASIK with a prescription of -3 or less is typically very easy and routine. I highly recommend it.

The SMILE procedure is not yet FDA approved in the US, so I cannot comment on it.

LASIK is an extremely safe and effective treatment for a low amount of nearsightedness such as you have. Assuming you are a good candidate for the procedure, which can be determined by your surgeon, I see no reason why you cannot enjoy independence from glasses and contacts. Numerous studies have been done which confirm the safety and long term accuracy of the treatment.

You probably could have LASIK eye surgery as long as there are no other conditions that would rule it out but you will need a comprehensive eye exam to determine that.  Whether you should have LASIK or not is a personal decision that depends on your willingness to accept the low amounts of risk that are associated with the procedure in order to obtain independence from glasses and contact lenses.  Cost is also an issue to consider as many more people would have LASIK if it were less expensive.

Most people are very satisfied (perhaps 97% or higher).  Very many say it is the best decision in their life.  A small few are not happy and say they should not have had the procedure. 

If you can accept the risks and are a good candidate, then you will likely be very satisfied with LASIK.

I have been performing Laser Vision Correction(Lasik and PRK) in the United Stares, since its approval in 1995, and had been going to Canada to observe and perform procedures in advance of the US approval. So, needless to say, I am a big fan of both Lasik and PRK. Typically, if the cornea is healthy and the nearsightedness is on the low side(like yours), I give the patient the option to have either PRK(I call it advanced surface ablation) or Lasik. The advantage of Lasik is quicker recovery and a faster return to everyday duties. I will never say anything bad about PRK, as it is the procedure I had on my eyes in 1994. The recovery is slower, though, and that has to be figured into your decision. The most important thing to be said about both Lasik and PRK is that, with over 25 miliion of thes procedures having been performed in the world, the longterm safety and accuracy has been documented to the utmost degree. I perform alot of both procedures and would be comfortable with either one on your eyes....you will love seeing without glasses or contacts!

I don't see why not.  LASIK has been proven over many years now and its safety/effectiveness are unparalleled.   A -2.25 is like a 1 foot putt for most experience LASIK surgeons and it is highly likely that you end up with at least a 20/20 outcome.   Having said all that, it is imperative that you are a perfect candidate for the procedure.  You need a visit at a reputable Laser Eye Center/surgeon to make sure you are suited for the procedure.  Once you are deemed an excellent candidate, your chances for an amazing success are very, very high. 

if you have -2.25 the chance that you will be 20/20 afterwards is about 98% if you do regular definition, 99% if you do hi-definition/custom/wavefront/CustomVue etc

i would suggest you do LASEK instead, as the odds are slightly higher than the above, especially the odds of BETTER than 20/20, which in my hands improved for your Rx from 40% to 60% when i switched fr LASIK to LASEK

the downside risk is also slightly better for LASEK than LASIK because there is no cutting w LASEK