24 replies to this topic

[Scubysnaps]

I've just had both my natural eye lenses replaced with silicone lenses, my eyes were always too bad for laser surgery and previously the only alternative was to have intra-ocular lenses fitted replacing the natural one in my eye, but these have been synthetic in the past, until the last 6 months, now they are silicone, the old synthetic ones only achieved monofocal vision so you still needed glasses for near or far distance, now with the silicone ones they are multi focal. They also last for life unlike laser surgery....had one eye done a week last Friday and the other one last Friday. The procedure is very quick and all they do is give you a local anaesthetic on your eye (drops) and a sedative... then they use ultrasonics to cut your eye and then to break up your natural lens, then they push out the old lens thru the cut and then insert the new lens rolled up, and unroll it once in your eye...job done, takes all of 10 minutes! The op is painless, more relaxing if anything, Got it done thru Optical Express in London, got 18 months interest free credit too!! Well recommded...no diving for one month is the only down side!

Looking forward to putting them to the test in 31 days in Bonaire!!

[johnjvv]

Good for you...hope it all works out!!!

[Steve Williams]

Wow, That's amazing Paul. Hope it all goes extremely well for you. Did you ask them if you could have a W/A zoom put in one eye just for fun?

Cheers,
Steve

[Scubysnaps]

Ha Ha! Thanks Steve, the thought did cross my mind yes!!

[Scubysnaps]

Cheers John too btw, it sorta got me thinking Steve my eyes have changed from a compact with a diopter over the top to an interchangeable SLR! Just have to learn to change them myself now! reminds me also of the film Iron Man but eyes instead of the heart!

[Scubysnaps]

I feel some photoshopping coming on!

[Kilili]

Thanks for posting this. It's a path I'll need to follow as well. London? Guess that means the US FDA has not approved yet?

Edited by Kilili, 27 February 2012 - 10:10 AM.

[rtrski]

Actually I think that surgery is currently done in the US too. My parents both just had it, but in their case it was for cataracts as the 'root cause' being addressed. The focal correction was a side-benefit (if they're replacing the lens, may as well replace it with one that's intentionally designed to maximize the benefit).

They'll still need reading glasses as at their ages, the eye muscles that would normally have helped flex the original lenses have deteriorated. But they're both reporting excellent results for distance and middle-distance vision. My dad also commented that he hadn't realized how much cataracts were robbing him of color...he knew everything was 'smeary/clouded', now he knows it was sepia as well.

I'm not certain that the lenses they got were silicone, but my dad did specifically mention the small incision and that the lens was inserted rolled-up and unfurled once in place. They can also apparently touch up with a little LASIK on top of the lens swap, if they need to.

[pmooney]

Great Post - Been considering the IOL procedure for multi-focals for a while.

Keep us informed of your progress as your eyes / muscles get accustomed to things.

Peter

[sdingeldein]

I hate to throw a bit of cold water on the enthusiasm, but I am a cataract surgeon and there are a few things to consider before going this route (cataract surgery if one has a cataract and clear lens extraction if one doesn't have a cataract).

First it not (at least in the US) a silicone versus synthetic. There are silicone IOLs and PMMA IOLs, typically an acrylic IOL that is foldable. Multifocal IOLS are available in acrylic lenses and have been for several years. The different IOLs do their "multifocal" work in different ways, but most of them work on a "robbing Peter to pay Paul" optical principle, typically some form of diffraction or different powers in the lens.

Second, not all is hunky dory with multifocal lenses due to the fact that none (except claimed by the Crystal lens) work the way your eyes did when you were young. The diffractive and refractive IOLs tend to produce softer vision and there are problems potentially with halos at night. Occasionally, rarely, a patient wants one removed because they do not like the quality of vision. Monofocal lenses do not give you up close and distance vision but arguably give one a better quality of vision. And the success rate of multifocals varies. I tell patients they have about an 80% chance of not needing glasses most of the time, but that most will need glasses especially for small print.

Lastly, there is risk to the surgery, including a less than ideal outcome, infection (1:1000/3000) and cataract surgery increases the risk of having a retinal detachment, especially in a high myope (nearsighted).

Yes, LASIK can be done to "touch up" a less than ideal result.

[davephdv]

The cataract surgeons in the practice I work in are using second generation multifocals.

Much better than the first generation. Still some complaints about glare and or not great near vision. I have only seen one of the newer ones being taken out.

They do a fair amount of touch up lasik.

We now have the fermato ?? laser. They do the entire procedure by laser now.

Cataract surgery if you don't have a cataract is called clear lens extraction in the US. A LOT more expensive than lasik, and greater risk as mentioned above.

I have had 3 patients who were young and had extreme myopia over 15 diopters. They had phakic IOLs implanted. A lens similar to a cataract lens (IOL) was inserted in front of their natural lens. Preserves accommodation and corrects their vision. They have to be the 3 happiest patients I've ever had.

[Scubysnaps]

The Mplus multifocal is the lens I have fitted
http://www.oteurope....e/detail/626897

I was told my eyes werent suitable for laser at all, and if I needed a touch up they would fit a piggy back lens, basically another one on top. An op that takes 10 minutes it really doesnt sound like brain surgery to them. Maybe to us though! Ones' eyes are tested by computers/machines, the traditional test with an optician asking if its better with that lens etc is only a back up to the computer results, I was concerned about the fact that my comments were inaccurate as sometimes its hard to tell which lens is clearer, mine are spot onat most times.
Ive had minimal halos, I've been night driving twice a day for 2 weeks now and no halo's whilst driving, just a tiny amount as I walk into a lit area, I have 16/20 (or was it 17/20?) vision so they told me...better than 20/20 although I still struggle to see some things, the lenses need about 3 months to settle completely.
HTH

[derway]

Second, not all is hunky dory with multifocal lenses due to the fact that none (except claimed by the Crystal lens) work the way your eyes did when you were young.

So how about that crystal lens?

[Scubysnaps]

I've just been for a check up, all ok...I was told if I introduce anyone to this surgery or even laser, we can both get unto £150-300 back off the treatment...PM me if you intend to contact Optical Express, UK, about this

[Scubysnaps]

I went for my 3 monthly check up yesterday...better than 20/20 vision.....I also spoke to them about the op, its only available in Europe and they currently have many US customers flying over here for the op

[Steve Douglas]

A fascinating thread and I have learned quite a bit. I use progressive bifocals now and have lens on my dive mask that are wonderful. I tried contact lens back in the 90's but couldn't get used to them. I would stand up in front of my classroom full of students with tears streaming down. Then when I tried to get them out, I sometimes couldn't find them and thought they floated to the back of my brain or something. Just hated them. So I thought of getting Lasik surgery as I have a stigmatism as well but was told that I would still need to wear reading glasses. My thought was 'What do I need surgery for something that I would still need glasses for as I read all the time". Then I was also told that the surgery results only lasted a few years anyway. So forget that.

When will they come out with a surgery to do away with color blindness so I don't have to ask my wife to check my color corrections all the time?

Never the less, great discussion here.
Steve

[Aquapaul]

I got Lasik 13 years ago and still have 20/20, my wife did it a year later and has a little better then 20/20 after 12 years. But we both need readers. We are both 54 years old. We are both very happy we had it done. It's made a world of difference in our lives.

[tdpriest]

I hate to throw a bit of cold water on the enthusiasm, but I am a cataract surgeon...

... there is risk to the surgery, including a less than ideal outcome, infection (1:1000/3000) and cataract surgery increases the risk of having a retinal detachment, especially in a high myope (nearsighted).

Thanks for some reality! The foolish simply believe the advertising, the doctors won't (always) have the treatment themselves...

... and what's the matter with glasses, or lenses in your dive mask? Few of us are good-looking enough to benefit from surgery, and many of us look better hiding behind our spectacles!

Tim (pessimistic anesthesiologist)

[Otara]

Thanks for some reality! The foolish simply believe the advertising, the doctors won't (always) have the treatment themselves...

... and what's the matter with glasses, or lenses in your dive mask? Few of us are good-looking enough to benefit from surgery, and many of us look better hiding behind our spectacles!

Tim (pessimistic anesthesiologist)

I agree that its good to separate the advertising from the reality.

However for me lenses inside the mask had lots of barriers as my old prescription was quite high, let alone photography underwater with a DSLR. I think its ultimately an individual decision rather than an overall good or bad idea.

Mine are a compromise in that they're the older single focal length type, one near, one far. One thing I have noticed is that my night sight seems worse, I think because of lower contrast.

Overall Im glad I had them done, but if you can use contacts instead, I think they're a far better option overall.

Otara

Edited by Otara, 21 May 2012 - 04:22 AM.

[Scubysnaps]

My eyesight is better now than what it was with glasses or contacts...but there's still room for improvement when they improve stem cell technology top remove my blind spot...high hopes!