near vision poor after getting Symfony...seeking others' experience

I'm still happy I chose the Symfony, for what it's worth. I knew going in that my near vision would be the worst off, relatively. I just didn't think it would be off as much as it is I'm still hopeful that I can get the residual astigmatism and added hyperopia resolved via laser or some other means--and both of these are things that can occur with any lens, including monofocals.

Symfony, which includes both toric and non-toric, was approved by the FDA last month and is now available in the U.S. Unlike multifocals, which are more like bi-focals, it typically provides distance vision comparable to monofocals, and good to excellent intermediate vision, and decent to good near vision; multifocals, meanwhile, have good near and good distance, but have a noticeable drop in acuity in between, in the intermediate range. Since I'm in front of a computer all day, intermediate was important to me (also for social interation and general getting around). Given that and the fact that Symfony also lacks the glare/halo issues associated with multifocals, that's what I chose.

So I am still confused.  Are you telling me that the symfony is supposed to get over 80% chance of seeing 20/40 in near vision as well as excellent in intermediate and distance and that, for whatever reason, u were just "unlucky" that you were in the minority of those people whose near vision didn't come out so well?  Seeing excellent in near is more important to me than seeing excellent in distance.  I know the overwhelming majority of peole prefer distance to near but not me.  I have had to wear glasses for distance all my life so I m used to it.  I decided to wait fo the symfony because it seemed to offer what the mulit focals offered, plus the advantage of good intermediate, plus the other advantage of much less chance and severity of halos at night that the multi focals are so famous for.  So now I am reading that you had the symfony in one of your eyes and were surprised at the unexpected poor results for your near vision.  So my question is, I was told I have slight astigmatism but not so bad.  I have to go back and get precise numbers tied to that so I can post more precise information here I guess.  But I thought if I adjusted my focal target to say intermediate instead of to disntance, that my extended "range" that the symfony gives you would be enough to give me excellent near and intgermediate, even if my distance was not as perfect as I could have made it if I set my tartget focal range a little further out.  Am I missing something?

As WebDev indicated in an update on this page, his current subpar results are due to residual astigmatism and the lens power being off target leaving him hyperopic. They aren't indicative of the performance of the lens itself, vision with a monofocal with the same residual refractive error issues would be much worse, and it would cause trouble for any other premium lens as well. 

That said, it is true that the results of lens studies are just averages since the actual results vary with each person based on the quality of the rest of their visual system, e.g. its natural depth of focus and the sensitivity of the retina, etc. There are a tiny minority of lucky people that can even read a little with a monfocal set for distance, but its best to plan on average resutls, while being prepared they may not be quite as good.

I wouldn't say the Symfony offers the same as bifocals in that the odds seemd to be that its  intermediate is likely better buts its near not quite as good. Yes, locating the focal point at intermediate rather than distance would give very good near, up  to a point. Unfortunately as you get nearer in, it takes more diopters to provide additional near so there is a limit to how near you'll get with any IOL since they don't provide the 18+ diopters of accommodation a young adult has. At the spectacle plane, a focal point of - X diopters focuses at (100 / X) centimeters, so -1D is at 1 meter, -2D is at 50 cm, -3D at 33.3 cm, -4D at 25cm, -5D at 20cm, etc. 

 

Hello Brian,

Thank you for your honest insight. I too have been contemplating my cataract surgery for about a year or so until the Symfony has came out in the U.S. I am myopic so I can relate to the struggle mentioned in this thread. Not having near vision post-surgery seems scary and a bit disappointing since my long wait. I also have significant astigmatism in one eye that needs to be corrected while the other one doesn't have as much so I guess I'd have to be getting a Symfony toric and a non-toric Symfony for the seperate eyes although I'm not sure if both will work well with one another. This also worries me because I swayed away from monovision but people tell me that micro-monovision will be easier to adapt too. I am just hoping it feels "natural". Reading about the lack of near vision would you encourage individuals to set their eyes differently in focus perhaps 0.5 off for more near vision? Also did you consider micro-monovision prior to surgery? Thank you.

Brian,

It's nice to have, for this discussion, a participant who is not only a cataract surgeon but also a patient who has had a symfony lens implanted in one of his eyes too. Wow. perfect.  So here is my question.

I have been putting off my cataract surgery until the symfony was available in the U.S.  I guess it now is.   I spend a lot of time indoors and I have been nearsighted all my life.  I can't see anything distance withotu my glasses and I cannot see anything very near unless I take my glasses off. I have progressives.  When I sit at my desk in front of my computer I take my glasses off.  I cannot imagine how uncomfortable I would be not being able to read a text message on my phone without having to put on "readers".  I like being able to walk around my apartment without glasses and I like, when the phone rings, being able to read my caller ID without having to find my glasses to see the screen.  Near vision is very important to me and I really  do not want to lose that.  I was under the impression that, with the symfony, you had an extended range of focus greater than simple monofocal lenses and that, for example, if I wanted to see clearly near, within 12 inchees, for example, that I would also be able to easily read my computer screen, which is about 27"- 30" away too.  Probably would have to sacrifice my distance vision to achieve that but that is a choice I thought I would have with the symfony.  Are you saying that, if I want good near vision with the symfony that I won't not only have any decent distance vision but I also won't even have good intermediate vision as well?   So what is the point of the symfony.  If that is the case, what is the difference between the symfony and a standard monofocal set to near?  I thought the whole point of the symfony was the [u]extended[/u] focal range.  What am I not uinderstanding?

Brian,

Thanks very much for the reply. I should've been clearer in my initial post that I'm not dissatisfied overall with the Symfony. And in fact the issues I'm having, it turns out, seem due not to the lens but to, I guess, bad measurements and unlucky orientation of the lens (it turns out I went from nearsighted to now 0.5 farsighted, and my astigmatism went from 0.94 to only 0.75).

I knew my near vision would likely be the worst after surgery; I just didn't think it would be as bad as it is. At ~20/80 near, I'm in the very low end of the distribution (comparing my outcome to those in the U.S. clinical trials, where fully 81% ended at 20/40 or better (the rest being 20/50 to, like me, 20/80).

It's not a complete shock, as presbyopia had set in about a year ago now. It probably wasn't as bad as it would have become, but I was at least getting used to dealilng with it.

Given the residual error I have, I scheduled an appointment with my surgeon two days from now. I'm hoping he has ideas and a willingness to resolve the issue with my current eye. I'd like to get that done before proceeding with my other eye, since it could affect the amount of monovision to target.

I'll update once I know what he recommends.

Thanks!

I'm sure you see Webdev's post above that his near vision issues are due to being left noticeably hyperopic and astigmatic. I'd suggest caution with this lens before assuming anyone with results like tose is having typical results since there usually is near vision with this lens, even if not as much as with multifocals (though of course some people have worse than average results). I have 20/25 at best near distance (with one eye on target at 0D and the other likely not contributing much at +0.5D since that noticeably degrades near) and can read the fine print on eye drop bottles and my smartphone.

In terms of your results, although my near vision was good a couple of days after surgery, I heard from one surgeon who said that neuroadaptation can take longer with the Symfony than with e.g. the AT Lisa trifocal he did a study to compare it to (though he didn't reply to a request to quantify that) so it may be that you  haven't yet gotten full adaptation to the lens. You also don't note what your refraction is to guess if that might be playing a part.

The Symfony's site reports about 20/30 average vision at 50cm, around the 20 inch mark you refer to. One study puts its visual acuity as being the best from 46 cm outward among premium lenses. Micro-monovision seems the best bet for getting more near. 

I do miss the convenience of uncorrected near vision.  If you want to retain the close near vision, the Symfony cannot provide that.  You can opt for the earlier Technis multifocals that have three power choices for near.  An optometrist colleague who sees many post op patients feels the highest power near multi is NOT a good choice in his experience.  I don't know if it creates a near focal point that is too close or is there are optical distractions. The other option is to stay near sighted at your current power and your life won't change much. And you won't have the night vision issues.

Forget monovision option.  If you haven't lived in that situation in contacts, you most likely won't like it.  You  lose depth perception.  Women adapt better to that than men.  I have my  theories, but not confirmed in literature, so biased.  Mini-mono with Symfony can help, but not give you good close near vision.  Now two weeks out, the intermediate range seems further out- my 18 inch near vision not so good.  Again, probably better if binocular, but I fully expect to wear +1.00D readers all day for clear computer distance (I also like to sit close to screen).

No such thing as "natural" given the IOLs are plastic. I do like my diatance vision, that's for sure.

To be honest, I'm not sure the Symfony will do what you want for near vision.

Take your time.  Keep in mind, most surgeons have no idea what it feels like to live with one of these.  They generally are great surgeons, are ethical, but keep in mind, they make quite a bit more money implanting a "premium" IOL.  We get less than $700 for a medicare cataract surgery with standard monfocal IOL (the IOLs are excellent, in my opinion).

 

OK, now I get it.  Yes, ending up farsighed is a big issue and that is diminishing the effect of the intermediate vision as well as distance acuity.  I bet your surgeon will recommend PRK or LASIK to refine residual refraction.

Yes, curious to hear about your appointment.

The Symfony will provide excellent distance vision if you shoot for "plano" (zero refractive error) in surgical calculations.  I get the impression from your post, your near vision is most important.  The Symfony won't provide good near vision.  Let your surgeon know what's most important and he/she can counsel you on those options.  The range of near vision we all want exceeds what is technologically available at this time.  You mention 12 inches for near- Synfony can't do that.  Your surgeon can tell you about the other multifocals that can provide that near point.  But won't extend to 30" - that's a huge range.

I met with the surgeon today and we agreed to postpone surgery on the next eye. He found the same residuals as my optometrist, i.e. about +0.5 with about -.75 astigmatism. He thinks some of this may diminish with further healing, so we have yet another appointment set now for next week. If things are still poor then, he said he likely will want to some laser correction, but we didn't get into details on that yet--he said he didn't want to make any assumptions at this point. So..I'll have yet another update in a week. Stay tuned!

Brian and everyone,

Appreciate the reply. I just wanted to share with everyone my Symfony evaluation that I finally got done yesterday here with a clincial trial doctor. First of all I do have astigmatism, 1.0 in one eye, 0.5 in the other. I've been myopic all my life, but eyes function as monovision somewhat. (I take glasses off for near, wear for intermediate and distance. My main goal is to get corrected for distance and intermediate while maintaining the most near vision that I can and being the closest to glass independence. Again I've had multiple opinions from different doctors for over a year regarding lens options and I put it all on hold since the Symfony was released in the U.S. After reading all the experiences about people complaining that the near vision was not enough after setting Symfony to distance and with other clinical trial doctors mentioning to go for about 0.5 difference in one eye for better near, this was the mindset I had when I went for my evaluation.

Long story short I was given three choices from my Symfony clinical doctor that did my evaluation. 1) Two Symfony for distance which will provide me with good distance, intermediate, and some near. Doctor mentioned I may have to wear reading glasses for things VERY close only but then again this seems different than what people have been sharing regarding there not being enough near vision. 2) To leave me nearsighted with the Symfony, which would be the same as how I function now, take glasses off for near and wear for others. 3) For monovision, and I did mention "minimonovision" and what I'd like to do with the Symfony of being 0.5 off for a bit more near, he mentioned this was not a good idea as Symfony is stronger for distance and having a bit of monovision like that would not result in a good outcome. Instead he had mentioned a Symfony in one eye and a low add Tecnis multifocal in the other for monovision.

Main concern as I mentioned to SD talking to him privately, is firstly minimonovision wasn't a recommended method which threw me off. Most importantly my edoctor also mentioned he won't know if I will be getting the Symfony non-toric or torics until the day of surgery when there is more accurate astigmatism measurements. I never heard this one before..so I won't even know what versions are going in my eyes until d day. I took these concerns and decided to email a Symfony doctor in another state for a second opinion, he's the one who had told me to go for a 0.5 difference for near and confirmed that it's possible and a good idea with the Symfony. When I expressed my concerns and options to him he had replied with I've put in around 30 Symfony lenses over the last three weeks. At this point I would advise you to wait and let the surgeons get comfortable with the technology. The ZKBOO Tecnis Multifocal may be the better option for you if the astigmatism can be treated with the femto laser. I have not been blown away with the visual outcomes of the Symfony lenses that I have just put in. Patients are happy not ecstatic. ZKBOO patients are thrilled. It may be that it takes longer for patients to adapt. Better for you to wait and let the surgeons figure out on someone else."

Now my doctor did not prefer using femto so the Tecnis lowadd itself would not correct my astigmatism so having both Tecnis multifocals might be out of the question. But there is a possibility of the Symfony/Tecnis blend assuming the 0.5 astigmatism eye does not require correction and assuming A Symfony toric is put in the other with a Tecnis multifocal for near. I've read that it's not good to mix different brands of lenses together and the outcome may not be as good. So I don't know what to think of this option. I had mentioned to the Symfony doctor in the other state that my doctor here is also a clinical trial doctor and that my astigmatism won't be corrected by femto. Today he replied with "An email string today of my high volume peers cautioned about glare/halos that they have seen in Symfony patients. Yes you can do minimonovision with Symfony. Best to wait a little if you can."

It's a bit scary and disappointing to here about the experiences with the lack of near vision and outcomes with the Symfony and today from the other doctor regarding the glares/halos incident after my long wait of pushing back cataract surgery (My right eye is pretty bad worse than my left but told I could pass a driving test with new prescriptions is my current state of cataract). So with all my concerns I figured it would be best to contact my evaluation surgeon regarding more clarifications about the three options he gave me and to express more concerns about near vision despite the fact that I excluded and did not mention the other things about Symfony from the out of state doctor to my surgeon. He basically replied that based on our discussion and evaluation yesterday that the Symfony set for distance will give the best distance and intermediate vision. Near vision with this will likely be good, but may need to hold reading material a little farther out. And that I would need low power reading glasses for some things. 

With mini-monovision for the Symfony being blown off from my surgeon I don't really know what to think as that's what i considered prior to the evaluation and it does seem possible based on what I gathered from other doctors and individual experiences. I don't know what to expect if I went for the Symfony/Tecnis multifocal mix either and not fully sure if that would be capable of correcting my extent of astigmatism as well whether the amount of monovision will be too much negatively affecting other factors such as 3D perception etc. I do know that I don't want to jump into surgery for two Symfony distance and hoping for satisfying near vision cause I've been myopic all my life and I read about all the concerns regarding the lack of near vision with plano Symfony. On top of that I've been told to wait before I proceed with the Symfony from the other trial doctor and perhaps consider two Tecnis multifocals, which again may not be suited for me since i won't be having femto. I do realize there is no best option and that being glass independent for all distances will be difficult, but with my wait and the money I'll be spending I want to be satisfied and have confidence in the surgery I'm going into. But with the information not aligning from different sources it's discouraging and I can't wait much longer for cataract surgery. Don't mean to flood WebDev's thread with my experience, but I figured it's worth a share. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

 

 

Jason,

For what it's worth, my experience in talking with different doctors prior to surgery and honing in on what I wanted to do was very similar to what you describe. And most important, I found that you can talk to four different ophthalmologists and get four very different, very strong opinions on what the best course of treatment would be. I was fairly disappionted to find that, as it cast doubt and confusion on what to do. Ultimately, I decided that the variability in these recommendations was due in good part to external factors (relationships with manufacturers; comfort and familiarity with established, tried and proven techniques; a justified suspicion of cure-all claims, especially relating to multifocals--and many incorrectly consider Symfony a multifocal).

In the end I sussed that out, and decided to base my decision mostly on what I considered more sound evidence, the clinical trial data. Read through the trial data submitted to the FDA. It's actually pretty interesting, and you'll get a solid sense of what to expect for the *typical* outcome with Symfony. Your stated goal--"to get corrected for distance and intermediate while maintaining the most near vision that I can and being the closest to glass independence"--in my opinion describes the demonstrated typical outcome for Symfony dead on. That's my opinion, and it may be clouded by my own experience, where I'm holding out hope that my experience will be fully resolved--and even now I'm mostly satisfied, and I, my optometrist and my ophthalmologist, all agree that the current shortcomings in my vision are due not the lens itself, but a) to possible overcorrection, possibly due to in-process healing, and b) possible toric misalignment; both of which are issues associated with all IOL types.

Also, FWIW, my opthalmologist said that micromonovision with Symfony is a possibility. Tecnis promotional materials (Google: symfony monovision "NEW ZEALAND CLINICAL STUDY CONFIRMED BENEFITS" recommend this as a strategy.

Good luck!

WebDev,

Appreciate the reply and I completely agree, I've been to several opthamologists and they all had different opinions regarding cataract surgery and IOL options, even the ones from same clinics differed and ultimately it's our choice to decide on what is best for us. I guess it's not that I've been indecisive but just cause people tell you so many different things it's hard to get to that middle line. Right micromonovision is a well preffered strategy even with the Symfony so him throwing it off was misleading to me since that was my original option now it seems like I'm just circling around deciding on other multifocals such as the Tecnis low add with Symfony etc. I could go for the Symfony distance like he mentioned but a lot of people are concerned with the lack of near vision and said micromonovison would be their preffered option if they did it all over again but isnce that option is not open for me so it's difficult. 

Glad to hear that your optometrist confirmed that your concerns about poor vision will get better and yes definitely keep us updated with your journey as well.

Its unclear where the concerns re: halos and holding off are coming from. They moderate links here, so I'll say to check Eyetube (dot net) for a recently added video from Dr. James Loden, and his video on Eyeworld video reporter you can search for (or an article on his talk on it) where he discusses looking at the data from the major studies in detail regarding halo&glare. The data in such studies is going to dwarf what one surgeon will see, and some surgeons seem to have negative preconceptions about premium lenses and suffer from confirmation bias in how they question patients about issues. The doctors I'd read/heard seem to indicate that even those who have halos with the Symfony are like me, they find them not to be a problem, they are translucent and mild. 

Tecnis multifocals are the same brand as the Symfony, just a different optical design (you mention some concern about mixing brands, though I also don't think thats an issue). 

re: "Symfony of being 0.5 off for a bit more near, he mentioned this was not a good idea as Symfony is stronger for distance and having a bit of monovision like that would not result in a good outcome."

Its not clear where he is getting that from, the study results show only a minor degradation in distance from a small bit of monovision. Most IOLs provide some decent vision a bit further out than their focal point, so a lens at -0.5D will provide a fair amount of distance vision and then its combined with the other eye targeted at distance. Obviously its distance is not as good as both eyes being set for distance, but its better than the level of distance from full monovision. Multifocals do suffer some degradation of distance due to having a 2nd focal point, albeit not much either, so I'm not sure how distance vision mixing a multifocal with the Symfony would compare with distance vision with micro-monovision with 2 Symfony lenses. 

Yup, you will get more near from a bifocal, the issue is how important that is to you. In my case I preferred the sharpest distance&intermediate I could get. I do use a desktop computer with large monitors set at what would be an intermediate distance so I have less need for near, I do most of my reading on those screens (even ebooks). Someone who needs more near might consider a multifocal... at the risk of a bit less intermediate. The difference is likely small so its hard to say how noticeable it is, I don't recall offhand whether there has been a head to head study of the Tecnis low add mutlifocals vs. the Symfony. I seem to recall an ASCRS conference abstract from their most recent conference referring to a study being done mixing a low add multifocal with the Symfony but it didn't give results in the free abstract. I'm not sure if its ongoing, or if you could track down the doctor and ask for results.

 

Hi SD,

Thanks for the reply. So the glares/halos increasing is basically skewed data based on a small number? I know you are one of the unlucky ones who do have minor glare/halos but I have yet to read an experience where people have none with the Symfony whereas monofocals had no mention for some lucky patients. 

It seems that every opthamologist I see think of minimonovision as being a new strategy and often shrug it off and suggest full monovision. In any case the Symfony set for distance would have better distance and intermediate than a minimonovision or for mixing Symfony and a lowadd Tecnis multifocal? I know you mentioned the distance won't be affected much as in someone won't lose too much distance for making up for the near if were to mix, but intermediate would be affected quite a lot? So is there a higher need to wear glasses with a multifocal mix than there would be for Symfony distance or Symfony minimonovision? I'm also assuming the Tecnis low add multifocal has higher glares/halos than Symfony but I can't be quite sure.

I expressed my concerns to my surgeon regarding the Tecnis multifocal etc and he said lets proceed with the surgery with getting Symfony for the worse cataract eye (OD) and wait 2 weeks to decide later. I guess this is an idea? I did mention to him if it would matter which eye I had set to distance or more for near (if I were to get monovision later) so I could decide whether to get the Symfony distance in my OD or OS. He didn't mention anything like that. I don't really have a dominant eye it seems (not to my knowledge of doing the self-tests) so would it matter which eye has the distance Symfony and maybe multifocal in any cases? I won't know if I'm even getting the toric or non-toric till surgery date so was wondering if it was an important aspect to implant a toric or non-toric or a distance/near lens in a dominant eye or not. As I've read some people have had bad results if they put a near in their dominant eye and a distance in their non-dominant? Not sure if this is the case. I am myopic so I don't know if it matters choosing to put the distance in the worse myopic eye or the eye better for distance.

Brian,

You mentioned the minimonovision would not be good enough near even with the Symfony. How much near will I gain if I were to get one Symfony set for distance and the other Tecnis low add multifocal for near. Also will I lose intermediate vision forcing me to wear glasses for intermediate? I was told the Symfony distance would require me to hold objects further away from me since I'd lack near vision. Surgeon gave me an example that I can't hold a coupon up to my face and expect to see it but further out I would be (what range is this)? Is it about arms length and it is that sufficient near vision or is it closer to intermediate?

Also the eye getting the Tecnis multifocal would need astigmatism taken care of, not sure how that would be done since there is no toric version (1.00 diopter or so), less astigmatic eye is 0.5 which is getting the Symfony non-toric, perhaps I should consider getting the toric Symfony for the worse astigmatism eye and having that set for distance while getting the Tecnis lowadd for the 0.5 eye?

I am merely speculating in terms of why some surgeons might be concerned about glare/halo with the Symfony, sine the data from the larger studies suggest the risk is low. It could be they usually don't ask about halos/glare and merely ask how their night vision is and address the issue if someone mentions problems. If they explicitly ask, they may be getting more reports of it than they do if they don't ask, but the people seeing halos may not consider them a problem (as I don't, they are there, but not a problem).

re: micro-monovision and  "but intermediate would be affected quite a lot"

Micro-monovision would make less difference to intermediate, it'd likely be better because the near eye is focused more towards the intermediate. WIth full monovision a the level you'd use with monofocals the near eye might be so far in that it might reduce intermediate, but not with the small amount of monovision you'd use with the Symfony.

If you don't have a dominant eye, then it doesn't matter which is used for which (and even with a dominant eye, most people's dominant eye will switch if visual acuity dictates which one is best has switched, though perhaps not all). It doesn't matter whether the distance eye is toric or not.

The Tecnis low add multifocals have a low risk of halos/glare, but higher risk than the Symfony. 

 

Hi Brian - not sure if you are on these forums still or not.  Would like to share with you my experience with Symfony lenses.  I too am young for cataract surgery (53). I too was nearsighted -2.75 left eye and -3.25 right eye.  But strangely still had excellent near vision.  Only wore glasses since my teen years for distance.  Had first lens implanted 8 weeks ago and 2nd Symfony implanted 2 weeks ago.  I am very happy with the results.  After 1st implant could read at 16 inches now with 2nd eye done I can read st 11 inches.  I have not used glasses since surgery.  May want for very fine print - will see at 1 month post op.

My surgeon targeted for 0D and I see equally well in both eyes distance and near.  The compromise I did have to make was glare and halos around lights at night.  With city driving and streetlights I am not bothered by these however on dark roads I would say very troublesome.  Not sure I would want to drive in those conditions unless I neuro adapt in the future.  My surgeon did say due to my age and good near vision I would find there is a compromise so he did tell me about the night issues with Symfony lenses.  He isn't one to believe people neuro adapt.  He told me it is the design of the lens plusat a younger age pupils dialate more.  

Thought I'd share my experience as at post op on 2nd eye my surgeon said this is the expected outcome with these lenses that he had seen with his patients.  He doesn't test near vision until both eyes are implanted as Symfony lenses work best when in both eyes.  I tend to agree as after first surgery near wasn't as good as it has been last 2 weeks.  I am not sure whether you had just one eye done with Symfony or not.

Sue, thank you for sharing your experience. I had one eye fitted with the Symfony multi focal and can easily read at about 12" but the night lights are terrible. So bad that I will not do my other eye. I will just wait for some type of improvement/break-through hopefully in the near future. I did notice that through the multi focal lens, the view is lighter and not as vivid as the untouched eye. Did you notice that prior to doing your second eye?

Hi Amf555 - unfortunately both my eyes had cataracts. I was somewhat blindsided last Jan 2017 with the diagnosis.  I thought I just needed new glasses.  It had been 18 months since previous checkup with optometrist and no mention of cataracts then.  Right eye vision was 20/70 and left 20/60.  Not sure why this occurred so fast for me.  Colours were distorted due to cataracts so when right eye was done 8 weeks ago all colours were so much more vivid.  I did notice that in low light conditions (dimly lit restaurant I couldn't read menu out of operated eye well whereas unoperated eye could read it).  Now both eyes done in that situation I use iPhone flashlight- does the trick.  

If you don't need surgery on your other eye - yes wait as who knows what new technology will come along.  If you can't wait maybe a monofocal set for distance will counterbalance the effect. I do wish I could wait for 2nd operation but cataracts  impacting my vision.  I lived with wearing my glasses with one eye picked out.  Gave me a number of headaches -  not sure I wanted to wait.  Yes the halos and glare especially from ongoing car headlines are bothersome.  Hopefully for you something better will come along.  You got very good near vision with just one eye done (is that with unoperated eye closed)?  Wondering if that eye compensates .

The unoperated eye helps but not unnecessary to read. The ability to read makes the multifocal expense well worth it.

So agree.  I work with spreadsheets and computer full time.  I figure as I get older night driving isn't something I will choose or have to do whereas reading is something I enjoy.  I should say that city driving at night info fine.  With overhead streetlights it helps.  Dark highways / roads are more troublesome.  Perhaps too as my surgeon said pupil size has an impact on night vision.  When you are older your eyes dialate less in the dark.    I also read another tip I am going to try that I read online.  That is to turn interior dome light on in car when on dark roads.  Haven't tried it yet but will give it a try.