Collamer intraocular lens

Thank you! I'm more shocked the way surgeons continue to use acrysof lenses after so many and many reported problems, glare, halos and flickering to start with. My surgeon keep telling how perfect and enchanting they are. So he won't use nanoflex, He said they are old and now supplanted by new, extra-thin and extra-flexible lens ... Great, really! To spare 0,1 mm on corneal incision, you use something that is a nightmare in the patients' eye forever? I must look for a more sympathetic surgeon and I am going to. These nanoflex lens look just perfect, practically similar to human natural lens ... so, where's the catch?

The only catch (?) is that they are monofocal lenses and thus, are not multi-focal or extended vision IOLs. For most people, monofocal lenses will probably work out better if they are willing to use glasses for reading.

I care more about light phenomena (glare, halos) than sight. I don't care to see 20/20 with dreadful flashes and starburst day & night. My priority is a natural sight, not seeing without glasses. I'm wondering what's the difference between 0% water iol like Acrysof and 50% water iol like Nanoflex Anyone?

Their materials have different properties, specially their refractive indexes. Nanoflex's refractive index is only slightly higher than that of the natural water in the eye, while that of Silicone is higher than Nanoflex and the Acrylic is even higher. This mainly affects the internal reflections of light in the eye, with those with Nanoflex claimed to be about one sixth of those with Acrylic. These light reflections in the eye are one of the most significant complaints of many people after IOL insertion. Of course, on the con side, the same property makes the Nanoflex lens to be somewhat thicker than an Acrylic lens, which may require some adjustment to the incision used by surgeons for inserting the lens.

The NanoFlex IOL also does not have a toric version for those with significant astigmatism.  Rules me out.

Thank you, dear! And what is the difference among nanoflex plate iol and affinity collamer 3 pieces iol?

So sorry to hear you’ve had bothersome glare starbursts and flashes of light during day as well as night.  I don’t think that is intended outcome.  Most who opt for multifocal or extended depth of focus IOLs have great daytime vision - compromise being nighttime halos etc.  So wish there was some way of knowing ahead of time which lens is best suited for an individual rather than another surgery to explant and re-insert another IOL.

The main difference is that, as indicated by their names, Affinity Collamer is a 3-piece design while Nanoflex is a 1-piece design. The main difference in the 3-piece designs and the 1-piece designs is their haptics design, which affects the way a surgeon installs them. One or the other design may also be more suitable for individual patients. Most of the newer lenses tend to 1-piece IOLs.

I see. How about the edges? Does Nanoflex have squared or rounded edges?

Nanoflex has rounded edges. Thus, it will have PCO comparable with other IOLs with rounded edges. The IOLs with square edges have lower cases of PCO, but have higher cases of dysphotopsia. Thus, that seems to be an unavoidable compromise at this time.

Perfect. How about the material, collamer? What is its advantage over silicone and acrylic?

As I mentioned earlier, the main advantage of Collamer is that its (light) refractive index is closer to that to the natural water in the eyes, while silicone's is slightly higher and the acrylic's is even higher. This mainly affects the internal reflections of light in the eye, with those with Nanoflex claimed to be about one sixth of those with Acrylic. This also makes the Collamer lens slightly thicker, but that should not be a problem for a good surgeon.

Unfortunately without going into the fine detail these problems seem to be the case for a high percentage of patients that have had cataract surgery and the surgeons know this and try and fob you off by saying you will get used to it. I have all your symptoms but my crystal vision outweighs all of this and it does not bother me to much now a year on, and will always be grateful for my vision.

Thanks, collamer also has a dense core, where acrylic and silicone are "empty" inside, so the light doesn't reflect back and forth inside the lens. I went to complaint strongly and many times to my surgeon about those horrible acrylic lens and he dismissed me telling "you'll get used to". No sir, I cannot get used to, am 48 years old and after six months those annoying halos and glare are still there and they will be there forever. What annoys me is the fact that he didn't want to hear about the nanoflex lenses, telling "they are old model", no matter how still good are in solving problems like mine. Why many surgeons are like that?!

The most annoying phenomena with those lens is the side vision: fluttering, flickering, unstable, like there is water on the corner of the eye. Why is that? 

I was told that it is caused by what kind of lighting you are in, for instance I get those symptoms when I am in the supermarket with all the bright lights, but after a while I get used to it. It's a case of just not thinking about it. Easy said than done.

I get those symptoms even in daylight, not only in the supermarkets.

Yeah me too just more noticeable in supermarkets. Also it feels like I can see black at the corners of my eyes, but I was told that's where the artificial lens finishes.