IOL Surgery for Myopia Correction?

Don't do it if your corrected vision is acceptable right now.

1. Even at 55, your natural lens accommodates, admitting the best possible light from targets at a variety of distances. Most of us lose some near vision accommodation after age 45 or so but it still works for intermediate targets. IOLs can't match this and IOL vision will suffer in low light situations. CrystaLens claims to replicate a modest level of accommodation but most surgeons today think there are better options with the non-accommodating lenses.
2. Safety is pretty good but even if there is just a 3% chance of a bad outcome that would reduce your vision to substantially worse than it is now, is it worth it?
3. Lenses, materials, and surgical equipment are much better than 10 years ago. They'll be even better and safer when your best correctable vision becomes unacceptable.

Right now, I use progressive glasses at home. It is good for intermediate distance but not for near distance. Its reading power is +2.25 and I may need to change it some time soon. I don't like using it outside home as the ground is blurry with it. Instead I use my normal non-progressive glasses when I am outside. My non-progressive glasses give me a functional but not perfect vision at intermediate distance! If I need to read something at near distance, I just remove my glasses and bring my head close to the target at about 25cm.

You lose the "gift of myopia" (up close detailed vision) with IOLs. I just replaced mine because of cataracts and am just realizing how much I relied on just taking glasses off to read pill bottles, ingredients lists, and about anything else in small print.

When I wore -5D/-6D progressives, I found that my vision was much better when I used premium lens manufacturers rather than cheaper. I liked Hoya but imagine Zeiss would also be excellent for progressives. Progressives must be harder to make and fit high myopes. I spent 4 years after needing progressives before I found using better lenses makes all the difference.

My simple advice is, never do surgery that is not medically necessary.

Do not do it. Do not even think about doing it. Your natural lens has a lot of advantages that you do not want to give up until you have to. You will totally lose your accommodation ability, which is the ability to change the shape of the lens for different distances. The EDOF and MF technology in IOLs is not even close to what the natural lens can do.

.

Lasik is a little less invasive and risky, but the problem is that it permanently changes the shape of the cornea, and not in totally good ways. It can induce optical issues that an IOL later in life cannot correct. It also makes it difficult to measure the eye for an IOL. Implanting an IOL is much more invasive and permanent compared to wearing contacts. There are complications if the surgeon makes a mistake and the lens has to be explanted.

.

In short do not even consider an IOL until you have a cataract to deal with, and it will happen.

.

I think it should be illegal for surgeons to offer a clear lens exchange to an IOL simply for the chance of going without glasses.

.

The safety level of an IOL implant is not the issue you should be concerned with. It is the loss of your natural lens that you should be worried about. They cannot put it back in your eye as it gets destroyed in the implant process.

Thanks for the advise. In Canada, there doesn't seem to be any law against IOL surgery for myopia correction. I did have an appointment with Lasik MD to examine my eyes. I am sure they would have told me if it was illegal. I do have appointments with other clinics next week for consultation as well. Consultations are free so it doesn't harm.

What they said. Don't do either.

raminolta,

You've made statements that demonstrate that you've been researching, and that's very good! As for the LASER, in cataract surgery it is used to assist, making incisions more precise and facilitating the fragmentation of the eye's lens for phacoemulsification, among other refinements. But I don't remember reading that the use of LASER increases safety. Many surgeons, not being necessary, prefer not to use it. You mentioned that you just found out about PCO and YAG, and I feel like you got some fear!? I believe everyone on this forum is going to tell you not to trade your healthy natural lenses for artificial lenses (IOLs). I suggest that instead of researching the "advantages" of an IOL, pretend you DON'T want one, and research all the problems and compromises that come or might come with them! Vision limitations regarding distance, loss of contrast, loss of vision in low light, dysphotopsias, floaters, PCO, retinal detachment, epiretinal membranes, etc. Perhaps, as greg59 said, premium quality progressive lenses will give you the best vision you could ever have!

" I have done lot of research online on the positives and negatives sides"

One Question, "Positives from Whom????" The manufactures?

My Advice, from someone that has had both my natural lens replaced due to cataracts, "Don't!!!!!!!!!"

If you want to get rid of your glasses I would suggest investigating mini-monovision with contacts. Mini-monovision is one of the better ways to get a full range of vision with IOLs that is quite side effect free. You however can do the same thing with contacts. The trick is to fully correct your dominant eye for distance, and then under correct your non dominant eye by leaving it at -1.5 D. Especially with some remaining accommodation ability in your natural lens, you should have a good full range of vision from 12" out to infinity. Silicone hydrogel contacts have gotten pretty good. To simulate monovision before my cataract surgery I used Costco Kirkland ones that worked quite well for me. They are relatively easy to put in and take out, and are quite affordable. And, this will give you a good preview for what you might want to consider when it comes time to deal with cataracts.