I'm 41 and have cataracts in both eyes and the right eye has gotten considerably worse over the last year.
Both eyes are myopic (L: -7 with 28.12 mm AXL, R: -5.5 with 27.32 mm AXL). my astigmatism is around .7 in both eyes.
I've been research possible options and lens choices over the last year. I would like to be glasses free for distance and intermediate and do not mind glasses for reading. Night vision is important to me having good contrast no halos or glare is important in my lens choice. Like most patients and doctors, I want the best refractive outcome. I have narrowed things down to the following options for a mini-monovision setup set for distance (I would wind up doing the dominant right eye first followed by the left a few months later):
1) Staar Nanoflex Collamer lens -- I have the option of having the LensX femtosecond laser used for the surgery (w limbal relaxing incisions which should hopefully result in a good and centered capsulorhexis as well as faster recovery/healing. From what I've read about the laser, it seems that statistically the refractive outcomes are significantly better than manula capsulorhexis (studies had the same surgeon using and not using the laser for cataract surgery). I may also get some accomodative benefits from this lens which would help with a larger range of vision and better refractive outcome -- my axial lenght may limit that though.
2) Calhoun Vision light adjustable lens. This is not available in the USA (currently under FDA trials) but it has been used for a while in Europe as well as Mexico and seems to be a proven lens from what I have read so far. The big benefit of this lens is due to light adjustment a 95% or higher success rate is achieved for refractive outcome. Additionally ,the lens can be adjusted to be more aspheric so a wider depth of field and range of vision can be achieved in a mini-monovision setup.
I've also considered the AMO Tecnis one piece (ZCB00) but am leaning more towards either of the above options. Due to my myopia, I am stuck with lesnes that come in .5 D steps instead of some that come in .25 D steps so my refractive outcome is limited to a larger amount of error on the lens. Additionally my axial length and eye shape/myopia makes iol power calculation and lens placement a little more inaccurate.
PCO rates seem to be eqaul in both lenses from the little research and clinical data I've gathered. Costwise the two choices are about the same (the LensX laser is additional cost that would not be covered by my insurance) from what I have been quoted so far (using Codet Vision in Mexico for the LAL) but travel expenses and followups could add up for the LAL. If any complications occurred, then the Nanoflex would be the safer choice.
My question are:
1) Are there any downsides to the above choices?
2) Is there a choice I'm not considering? Crystalens is out due to problems reported (none of the 3 surgeons I've talked to seemed very comfortable with it) as well as significantly higher costs for little benefit if any. Multifocals are out as well due to night driving needs. I've considered the Synchrony lens which is available in Europe but not available in the powers needed for my eyes.
3) If you had my eyes and lifespan to live what would you choose?
I'm starting to explore options now and would appreciate an update. I'm curious what lens you choose, and your reasoning, and did you use Codet? I was considering them, and also wondering about the LAL. The Synchrony sounds like the most interesting option but I was unsure where outside the US to get it, I'm curious who you talked to. My worst eye is more myopic than yours, -9 , so I'm guessing I'd run into the same lens availability issue (something I hadn't considered) unless that's improved in the last few months. Thanks.
Copyright 1994-2016 MedHelp International. All rights reserved.
MedHelp is a division of Aptus Health.
This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information.
The Content on this Site is presented in a summary fashion, and is intended to be used for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be and should not be interpreted as medical advice or a diagnosis of any health or fitness problem, condition or disease; or a recommendation for a specific test, doctor, care provider, procedure, treatment plan, product, or course of action. Med Help International, Inc. is not a medical or healthcare provider and your use of this Site does not create a doctor / patient relationship. We disclaim all responsibility for the professional qualifications and licensing of, and services provided by, any physician or other health providers posting on or otherwise referred to on this Site and/or any Third Party Site. Never disregard the medical advice of your physician or health professional, or delay in seeking such advice, because of something you read on this Site. We offer this Site AS IS and without any warranties. By using this Site you agree to the following Terms and Conditions. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your physician or 911 immediately.