Does cataract surgery fix some need for glasses? I thought the surgery removed a hazy veil just inside the eye to it would stop scattering light, but glasses couldn’t fix this problem. Why am I hearing this about a family friend?
Cataract surgery removes the lens and replaces it with an artificial one. It can also correct near or farsightedness by using the right focal length lens, but it’s no guarantee and your eyes can adjust later so you might need lenses again at some point.
He’s right. After the surgery my Mom doesn’t need glasses anymore- after having worn them for at least 60 years.
In the early days of cataract surgery (oh, 1970s or so), the clouded lens was replaced with an artificial lens, which was a one-size-fits-all design. People who had the surgery would typically wear tri-focals, as far vision, near vision, and reading would all need some correction.
About 20 years ago, or so, technology had progressed to the point that they could custom make the artificial lens to the point that they could make it so the patient could see fine without glasses either at distance, or up-close, but would need glasses for the other. Most people opt for distance vision and just use reading glasses as needed. That is what I opted for. I wish I hadn’t, as I had been wearing glasses essentially my whole life for distance and was used to that, but, even with my cataracts, I could read without glasses (although computer work was a bit of a problem without them). Now, it is impossible for me to read without glasses. I used to read in bed until I fell asleep. Falling asleep with your glasses on is not as much fun as it sounds.
Current technology, I am told, has the ability for bi-focal artificial lens. I don’t know how they work. My ophthalmologist told me they were expensive and the amount the insurance would pay was limited, so I took the single-vision option and use cheaters.
But, yes, I can see 20/20 without glasses. I seem to have a slight astigmatism in my right eye that could be corrected, but my Dr. said that even without correcting for it, my distance vision was fine.
My mother was legally blind, but had some limited vision, and was still allowed to drive, before her cataract surgery.
After her surgery a few years ago, she didn’t need glasses anymore except for reading.
Hehe… she was actually driving me a little crazy the first couple weeks, reading aloud all the signs that she saw on the road. The gas prices, and so on.
But it was very touching when she sat in the front pew of our church for the first time after the surgery and saw, instead of a big blur, our beautiful stained-glass window.
ETA: Her eyes have since adjusted and she’s going to need glasses again, but it’s not an immediate need; we’ve been putting it off until we get some money together.
Wow! Thanks! Ignorance fought!
My wife just had her eyes done 2 weeks ago. There were three options.
-
An inexpensive plain lens (for people without insurance?)
-
An off the shelf lens designed to correct most of the vision problems but some people may need reading glasses. Fully covered by insurance as long as it covers cataract surgery. We had a $100 co pay with Blue Cross.
-
A custom ground lens that can correct all the vision defects. Since this was a “vanity” option the insurance does not cover the extra cost. Each eye would cost $2500.
We went two door number two but she has not had here followup exam yet.
There is a thread here that may be of interest:
The OP is from 2018, but the thread has been revived several times and has quite a few informative recent posts. In particular, see my post #263 with a link to a good article about multifocal intra-ocular lenses (the kind implanted during cataract surgery).
Short version: Cataract surgery removes the natural lens from the eye and replaces it with an artificial one. The patient therefore has the option of getting a lens focused for near vision, far vision, or any other distance. Or alternatively, for extra cost, one of the newer type of multifocal lenses, but they have downsides and are not for everyone. My personal choice when I get cataract surgery (in one eye) is to opt for a lens that matches the other eye, instead of getting into riskier territory. So I will still be near-sighted, and will wear my customary glasses for distance vision.
Or “monovision” which is a non-intuitive (to me) term for getting one eye focused for near vision and one for far. I can’t speak to how suitable it is for most people - I’ve heard anecdotally that a lot of doctors won’t do it, and they may have good reasons - but for me it was perfect. For many years prior to my cataract surgery, I wore contact lenses that set one eye for near vision and one for far, so I guess my ophthalmologic surgeon knew it was the right solution for me.
Getting old mostly sucks, from a physical standpoint, but for those of us saddled with wretched eyesight since childhood and the consequent eternal need for glasses or contact lenses just to stumble from bed to the bathroom in the morning, “Getting old enough that your cataracts are bad enough that you can have intraocular lens replacement and your insurance will pay for it and afterward you won’t need corrective lenses at all” seems like an awesome benefit.
The problem is that not everyone can adjust to monovision. Some people have brains that adapt to using the far-focused eye for far vision and ignoring the near-focus while doing so, and vice-versa for close vision. Some people do not have such brains and wind up needing glasses for all vision because of this. It can also adversely affect depth perception even if your brain adjusts, which makes it a bad choice for people who do things like fly airplanes or drive large trucks or play sports where depth perception is crucial.
Prior to surgery the person can go through a trial period where one eye is corrected for near and one for far which can help predict who can or can’t adapt and for the person to get some idea of what this would be like before doing something permanent like surgery.
On average, women tend to adapt better to this than men do although there are plenty of men who can adapt and plenty of women who can’t, we’re talking averages over large populations there.
Because of the variability in how well this turns out I can see where many doctors might be reluctant to do this.
I had both eyes done (a few weeks apart) and my vision is set at distance which makes it fine for driving etc.
I need cheap (£2.50} glasses for reading and computer work but that’s fine for me.
Well that is the right solution for myopia, which is the eye is too large, the lens is too far from the retina for the natural lens focus system to achieve focus for distance, its still able to achieve focus for near vision, and hence its called near sighted, or short sighted.
For presbyopia, the lens , lens structure has got old, (presby = old , remember Presbyterian churches are run by a council of “elders” ) , and that means the muscles would have to become stronger to make the same size of adjustment to the lens…
At first thought, it would seem that they would just be able to use a softer lens for weak muscles… But its not that simple, why not , I dont know, maybe the brain, maybe the nerves, maybe the muscles operate on the structure of the eye that remains too… anyway… So the new artificial lenses have a system of enhancing the focus adjustment, so that the focusing muscles can again make full range focus adjustments from reduced changes in shape. I think it is like a fresnel lens. Each ridge of the fresnel lens rotates as the lens changes shape, and so its an adjusting fresnel lens, so that the lesser adjustment of the shape of the lens achieves full range of focus lengths required to go from far to near vision,despite the lens only changing shape the lesser amount.
I’m glad to know this; I too have been wearing monovision contacts for many years and since I seem to be developing cataracts it’s good to know I can continue this way. The eye doctor who first fitted me for the monovision told me I might not find it easy to adjust, but I really never noticed a problem. He told me later that I adjusted more quickly than any patient he ever had. Guess this says something about my brain…not sure what.
The same procedure can be done as a means of correcting near sightedness in the same way as Lasik or PRK. It’s called an intra-ocular lens implant procedure, and you don’t have to have cataracts to have the surgery. It was approved by the FDA for cosmetic purposes about a decade ago. Many people that have thin corneas are not good candidates for Lasik, but intra-ocular lens implants are an alternative procedure.
Had mine done. My left eye is pretty much 20/20, but I have an astigmatism in the right eye (curvature of the eye) that requires correction. And I need the reading glasses, so it’s bifocals for life.
Huh. My corrected vision is excellent, but my uncorrected vision is really bad. I have really minor cataracts, and asked my doctor about replacing my lenses. She said it would be malpractice to do so, given my corrected vision.
So is LASIK malpractice as well, if your corrected vision is 20/20?
I think lasik does less damage to the eye than removing your natural lens and replacing it with an artificial one.
If all goes well LASIK arguably does less damage - if things go badly I’m not sure there’s much difference.
Lens replacement is pretty routine these days, it’s a tested technology.
I decided against LASIK several years ago because of the damage it does, honestly, and i expect to eventually be happy to get lens replacement.
(If things go badly, either can be really damaging. My uncle lost all vision in one eye, and a lot of the vision in his other eye, due to complications from lens replacement.)