I’m very nearsighted to the point that glasses don’t give me as good of vision as contact lenses. I can’t see myself putting contacts in my eyes when I’m 80, so I’m looking at surgical options. My prescription is such (11.0 diopters) that Lasik is probably out. I have been considering interocular lenses. Basically, its like cataract surgery, they cut open your cornea, remove your natural lens and replace it with an artificial one.
Has anyone had this done? What’s your opinion? Has anyone done this with the newer lenses that give you both far and near vision like the ReSTOR lens? How has night vision been (halos, star burst, etc.).
I appreciate the help.
I only know one thing about it, and I remember it from an animal physiology lecture: a natural lens has a slight magnetic field and an artificial one doesn’t. The magnetic field stops the constantly-replenished layer of cells on top of the eye from growing over the lens. Without it, those cells will slowly cover the lens and obscure vision. A minor surgery is needed, periodically, to clear them away.
This is from almost ten years ago, and a slightly weird professor… but anyway, that’s what he told us.
My sister had LASIK and she was >-11.00 with considerable astigmatism. She was VERY fortunate to have enough corneal tissue to “work with”.
I work for an ophthalmology practice. We do on-site cataract surgery and lens implants for people in your situation. I’ve never heard anyone complain about halos or night vision issues. To be fair, “successful” patients don’t need me anyway, as I am in the optical department.
Be sure to ask the surgeon about things like “mid range” vision, which may temporarily annoy you, even with ReSTOR. There are other presbyopic lenses out there too. Also keep in mind that even with the very best technology, you may still need correction after surgery. But it would definitely not be anything like what you need now.
Last month, I dispensed glasses to a patient who was -15.00 before cataract surgery. She was picking up her new bifocals, which had a total power of less than a diopter for distance. She was not a candidate for the “special” implants, but was near tears when she told me her story. Very liberating, I’m sure.
The surgery is costly (insurance will typically only help if you actually have cataracts), but I can’t imagine that it wouldn’t be worth it.
I had “epi.lens” lenses implanted last year (8.5 diopters before the surgery). My natural lenses were not removed, the artificial lens was simply added, so I can still focus naturally.
Yes, the surgery is expensive (about 5.000€ for both eyes here in Germany) and yes, I do have some problems: I’m much more light-sensitive now and need to wear darker and bigger sunglasses in the summer. I also do see slight halos in some lighting conditions.
That being said: it is totally TOTALLY worth it!!! Even now, after more than a year I sometimes wake up in the morning and just marvel at the fact that I can see clearly. Just like that! It’s unbelievable!
The halos and the light-sensivity are nothing compared to the hassle with glasses or contact lenses.
As WishIHadACoolName said: It’s very liberating to be suddenly able to see.
I’ve been thinking about this also, so please share any info you find! I’m at -12.5 diopters and don’t see well with glasses either.
There do seem to be two methods - one where they remove the natural lens (as they do for the cataract surgery) and one where they leave the natural lens. I think I’d want the second method, since it would be more easily reversible in case of problems.
I already have some problems with light sensitivity and halos, and my night vision has gone to crap with age, so I think I could handle that.
My concern has been presbyopia - I’m just starting to notice that my arms are too short sometimes :p. I’ll have to look at the ReSTOR lenses, I don’t think they had them out when last I looked at this.