Posted , 10 users are following.
Hi guys,
Wondering if anyone has had the IOL lenses surgery to correct their vision? I have myopia and astigmatism since i was 5 years, I'm not candidate for Lasik as my cornea is too thin but i was advised i could have IOL lenses inserted instead. All the research i've done on it shows that it is mostly used for cataracts so im wondering if anyone has done to correct anything other than cataracts and also how much was the procedure?
0 likes, 33 replies
janus381 delia20719
Posted
I'm also the conservative type, and I while I'm extremely happy with my results with the PanOptix, I personally would not do clear lens exchange.
I've mentioned before that my wife first looked into lens exchange at her optometrist's suggestion, because she was starting to have some periodically problems wearing contact lens. We are in Toronto, and she went to three of the top private clinics for consultation.Two said lens exchange was a good idea, while the third said she could get correction with PRK (not Lasik). She had PRK done and is pleased with the results.
Some thoughts:
While IOLs have improved a lot, and most people going for premium lens that give you good vision at near, intermediate and distance, a small percentage are not satisfied due to effects like halos and starbursts. While odds are good you would get good results, there is a not insignificant chance you won't be happy, and then you would regret having done elective exchange just to get rid of glasses.
IOLs get better with every new release. You can bet that improvements will continue to be made, so again why do it early just to get rid of glasses, when you will likely have far better options if you wait,
I suspect the cost is far higher than $2,500 per eye if you are opting for premium lens (which you would do if you are trying to get rid of glasses). $2,500 per eye sounds about right if it is medically necessary cataract surgery, as the provinces cover the basis surgery costs, and you only pay for the premium lens upgrade.But if it is not medically necessary, I think you are looking at a significantly higher cost.
If you really want to try to get rid of glasses, ask if you are a candidate for PRK. PRK does not require as much cornea thickness as Lasik. And while I am very conservative and never did laser vision correction, if I were to do it, I would consider PRK instead of Lasik.The downside of PRK is a longer recovery period than Lasik. But the flap in Lasik can create issues. And while most people who get lasik are very happy with the results, 1% really regret having it done. The worst case scenario for Lasik is extremely extremely bad. Look for article on WebMD called "Lasik Risk and Rewards"
Joe_M janus381
Posted
Just a silly question. When you say "clear lens exchange", I assume you mean people getting IOLs just to correct their vision and not to replace clouded natural lenses, correct? To be honest, I never knew that was a "thing". I would think that the only reasoning that would drive someone to do that would be to move to the premium IOLS so glasses are no longer needed. And now that would bring in the details of the "side effects" of these premium IOLs that have to be weighed. I am happy to live with the rings I have as I had a need for fixing the cataracts, so the trade-offs are just one of those things in the stack of pros and cons. But to do it "willingly" without that medical needs just seems strange to me. But, I do not live in their shoes, and maybe their vision is so bad that it is worth the associated risks.
Thanks all, and again, sorry if this was a silly question. Have an awesome day!!
janus381 Joe_M
Posted
Yes, that is exactly what I meant -- getting cataract surgery before you have cataracts just to get rid of glasses. It's also known as Reflactive Lens Exchange.
Some private clinics are promoting this as an option (as it's more money for them).
Guest Joe_M
Posted
Lots of people here in Denmark gets clear lens exchange when presbyopia sets in. we have had trifocal iols since 2010.
Surprisingly most people that get these clear lens exchanges are very happy about it, even that there is some side effects with these lenses.
janus381 Guest
Posted
I'm sure the majority who do RLE are happy, but the worst case if very bad, and may not show up for a few years.
In particular RLE patients are much more likely to eventually have retinal detachment than standard cataract surgery patients (due to most RLE patients being highly myopic and being younger - read in one article risk of eventual retinal detachment is 25 times higher). And RLE closes the door to better IOL designs that will come.
Many eye surgeons (including my surgeon) who are not interest in maximizing their income are also very wary of RLE. If vision is extremely bad, and person is getting close to age where cataracts are likely, then maybe. But if it just because person is tired of having to use glasses/contacts, or doesn't like progressive prescription glasses -- then I don't think it's worth the risk.
Search for article: ** "Refractive lens exchange: is it worth the risk?"**
My wife was looking into this before I knew I had cataracts. I'm glad she found a clinic that wasn't trying to maximize income and told her she was suitable for PRK laser vision correction rather than more expensive RLE.
delia20719 janus381
Posted
I really wish I could have either Lasik or even PRK but unfortunately after 3 visits to 3 separate clinics, they all told me I am not a candidate for either one of them. One of the clinics mentioned IOL but I opted not to do it at the time cause I was a little pricey, however now I am reconsidering it and re visiting a couple of clinics to get a better understanding of the pricing.
I also would love to wait for better technology but I have been waiting since I was 18 years old, last time it was 5 years ago when the clinic mentioned the only available procedure for me would be IOL as all other laser procedures can not be performed on my cornea so I have been sitting on this for 5 years now... I'm not rushing it though, I'm looking at all the risks and benefits before making a decision but I was very curious if people who had it (not to correct cataracts) were happy with the results or at least happier than before.
Sue.An2 janus381
Posted
Very well said Janus.
Sue.An2 delia20719
Posted
If you search you'll find those who are happy and those who aren't. My dad once said to me it is the difference between a recession and a depression. In a recession your neighbor is out of a job. In a depression you are without a job. Really night and day. If you end up happy all is good, but if you end up the small statistic all the stats in the world won't comfort you.
Again only you can weigh those risks. If you eyes correct with glasses for me I won not risk it personally (I too wore glasses since childhood).
janus381 delia20719
Posted
Delia, I think you will find that the majority who do RLE are very satisfied with the results. But while the risk of a very bad outcome is small, it is not so small that it can be ignored.
So if you don't do RLE, worst case is you will continue to wear glasses until you actually develop cataracts (and then the most of the cost of surgery will be paid for by the government, and you will likely better IOL options than those available today if you choose to upgrade). if you do RLE, worst case is impaired vision for the rest of your life. There are many eye surgeons who question the wisdom and ethics of RLE (doctors are supposed to "do no harm"), while others happily promote it as an option.
Now again, if you vision is extremely poor, and you are getting up there in age, where cataracts are likely to show up soon, then that may change the risk/rewards equation.Also, I think you will find the cost in Canada of RLE is considerably more than $2,500/eye .
delia20719 janus381
Posted
So I got it wrong but I would be getting ICL not RLE, I just got quoted $3k per eye (tax in) so now I'll start the research again and see if it's worth it.... d'oh! 😦
Guest delia20719
Posted
Oh, ICL is surely different, they are used here in Denmark as well. They can be removed again, and the surgery is a much less intrusive type, if the surgeon find you to be a good candidate for these, I would go for it.
In fact they are sometimes used to correct refractive errors on IOLs...
If you get them now, I believe you will be getting the monofocal type that corrects your refractive power and astigmatism, and you will still develop presbyopia when that time comes.
But good thing about ICL is that it is reversible.
Sue.An2 delia20719
Posted
Yes better as they are removable - not so with cataract surgery without a different surgery with considerable more experience with exchanging them.
delia20719 Guest
Posted
Thanks Danish Viking! on another note, I am hoping to make it over to your beautiful country soon enough, my husband and I have been making our way through Europe for a few years now and I want to get started in the Scandinavian countries next!
tamarinda delia20719
Posted
What is ICL? Intracapsular lens?
delia20719 tamarinda
Posted
it's an Implantable Collamer Lens so the eye’s natural lens is not removed and it's a reversible procedure.