Need advice. Blurry vision since cataract surgery 5 months ago.

Posted , 11 users are following.

I really hope someone can help me because I don't know what to do any more. I am exhausted, frustrated and not getting any cooperation/answers from my doctor/surgeon. I've had blurry vision in my left eye (OS) for five months since my surgery --- it is worse than before the surgery.

My doctor's office never gave me a follow up appointment other than the morning after my surgery. While I was communicating my vision concerns to them via their Health Portal (because nobody answers the phone) that something was wrong and I needed an appointment, the nurse said Dr. So and So said to just keep using the artificial tears. I said I've been doing that 4X/a day and it's not helping. I also have eye pain and burning. I finally got an appointment with the doctor after 5 weeks post op. He looked at my eye and said I needed YAG laser procedure. He didn't dilate my eyes. Just looked at them through his machines. I said will that help my vision? He said yes.

I had the YAG 9-weeks post cataract surgery. It did nothing for my blurry vision in fact made it worse because of the inflammation it caused. The only thing I noticed is that a film was lifted from my eye.

So after that I was in excruciating pain and contacted the office via the portal from you know where. They said to come back in a week. The doctor looked at my eyes (no dilation) and said I had inflammation. Gave me steroid drops. I took those for a month and scheduled an appointment with another doctor at the same clinic because I was not getting anywhere with this guy. My eye was burning, in pain and photophobia, etc. on top of the fact that I couldn't see because of the now even worse blurry vision. This doctor diagnosed me with Iritis. More steroid drops and some dilation drops for burning/pain. I asked him why my vision was still blurry and he said he had no idea since he didn't do my surgery. Then he dismissed me at my last appointment at my one month follow up and said there's nothing more he could do and was referring me to a neuro-opthalmologist.

I didn't really think I'd get an objective opinion from another doctor at the same clinic but I was extremely worried about my eye. After I was dismissed from the last doctor, I thought I could get an objective second opinion yesterday at a totally different clinic/doctor. But no. He said he couldn't do anything because he didn't do my surgery. But he could do laser surgery on my eye if I wanted it. He was totally rude and dismissive.

My suspicion from day one is that my surgeon gave me the wrong prescription for my lens. But I have no idea how to find out. I asked him point blank if that was possible and he said absolutely not. In the meantime, I was never told or given literature on what type of standard monofocal lens he was going to use. He also will not release the reasoning behind why I was approved for cataract surgery. I asked and they (the nurse) emailed me -- it was a combination of your vision/glare testing and one other test I forget the name. My vision in that eye was 20/20. But I had really bad glare/halos when driving during the day and night which made my overall vision numbers worse. I wasn't complaining about having surgery. I just wanted to understand the facts or what did they submit to insurance?

They also won't tell me what formula the doctor used to arrive at my prescription for my IOL. I am convinced that the prescription is wrong because nothing else is wrong with that eye based on all of the tests. So far I have gone to 3 ophthalmologists (including the surgeon) for eye exams. Nothing wrong except inflammation and of course my vision is now approximately 20/80. What is the big secret about determining cataract approval? And why would he not give me information on what formula/method he used to arrive at the lens prescription?

Does anybody know if it's possible to determine if the wrong prescription lens was implanted?

I saw some paperwork AFTER my surgery with the word Lenstar. And, the lens he used is Tecnis Eyhance monofocal. That was on the surgical notes paperwork from the surgery center because it was not in my file with this doctor.

Here's an excerpt from the Tecnis Eyhance literature:

*Prior to surgery, the surgeon must inform prospective patients of the possible risks and benefits associated with the use of this device and provide a copy of the patient information brochure to the patient.

Some autorefractors utilize only the central part of the IOL to calculate the refraction of the eye and that is the region where the TECNIS EyhanceTM deviates from the monofocal design which could result in a wrong estimation of the refraction. Manual refraction with maximum plus technique is strongly recommended."

Okay I'm not a doctor but I've had to learn more in the past 5 months than any person would care to --- especially with one bum, blurry, burning left eye and the other eagerly awaiting its own cataract surgery which sadly won't be any time soon.

Are most patients told which specific lens the doctor is going to use as well as the vision expectations in numbers? I was only told by my surgeon that my distance vision would be corrected and I'd keep using my reading glasses. I was good with that. Well I'm not good now.

Sorry for this long posting. I didn't know how to shorten it without leaving off important facts. If anyone could offer advice I would greatly appreciate it. I really just want to understand what happened. But I'm hitting road blocks all along the way. Which makes me even more suspicious. Thank you!

0 likes, 69 replies

69 Replies

Next
  • Edited

    "Does anybody know if it's possible to determine if the wrong prescription lens was implanted?"

    .

    Yes, all you need is a phoropter test and an eyeglass prescription. That will tell you what correction is needed to bring your vision back to plano.

    .

    What country are you in? For US and Canada there have been court decisions that determined that medical data belongs to the patient, and they have to give it to you. You may have to ask for it in writing, and pay their out of pocket costs to produce it, but that is usually the cost of a mouse click and a few sheets of paper.

    .

    They are obligated to give you a credit card piece of paper that documents what lens was used in your eye, the serial number, and the power of the lens. That should be given to you when you exit the surgery. The card comes with the lens they implanted.

    • Posted

      That's great information. Thank you Ron. I'm in the US. I have all of my medical files because I requested them in writing from their outside records company. However, they neglected to include lens information that the doctor used to decide upon my prescription. And other pieces of info that were not in my records.

      And yes, i did get a card AFTER my surgery telling me which model lens was inserted, serial number etc. It would have been preferable to have had that BEFORE my surgery. I went in blindly (no pun intended) for this surgery without any detailed information. Thanks for your help!

  • Edited

    I am sorry for what you are going through. If you are in the USA, I would go to your cataract surgeon and request a complete copy of your medical record. Per the HIPPA law,, they must comply. I would then try find a cataract surgeon at a

    nearby medical school who will read your record, examine your eyes, and hopefully advise you. I know you are worried, frustrated, and tired of seeing doctors.

    But you need to do it. I wish you well.

    .

    • Posted

      You're very kind thank you Lynda. I am in the USA and did get my records (or at least the ones I know about) however there is missing information that I believe the surgeon doesn't want to disclose. I am not too far (albeit several hours driving) from top eye medical facilities but I am going to fly to see a doctor next week who previously worked at the Mayo Clinic and has his own practice now. Thank you for your help!

  • Edited

    To clarify they said you were 20/20 before surgery but had glare? And you had a cataract as well?

    .

    Also did you ever visit an optometrist after the surgery? And will glasses correct you to 20/20?

    .

    It does sound like there may be something else going on other than the IOL or the IOL power. I wonder if a cornea specialist or retina specialist might have more insights?

    • Posted

      Yes that's correct David. No, I didn't see an optometrist. I was supposed to have a 1 month follow up with my cataract surgeon but they dropped the ball and didn't schedule me. Then I couldn't get in until 5 weeks post surgery.

      I went to a different ophthalmologist at another clinic a few days ago and he said my cornea and retina looked fine although I have inflammation. Then he patronizingly said there's nothing wrong that I can see. And since he didn't do my surgery he couldn't comment.

      I'm pretty sure my vision can be corrected, however I want to know what is going on with my eye before I correct it. If there is an incorrect IOL in there I'm not real happy about it. It's totally irritating my eye and also making my chronic migraines even more frequent because I have blurry vision and a cataract in the other eye. Sorry, that's more information than you need 😃 Thank you for your input!

    • Edited

      You really should go see an optometrist. Any place will do… Costco, a glasses place in the mall, whatever. You don't need a referral of course just to get a glasses prescription. This could tell you a lot. If the issue is simply a missed target and not something more serious they can figure that out.

  • Edited

    Normally you would have been supplied with compound drops that include steroid and antibiotic.

    At this point I suggest you get your eyes tested by an optometrist, just as if you were being fitted with glasses. Ask for the prescription in writing. A prescription will have 3 numbers for each eye.

    I have no insight as to your more complex questions.

    • Posted

      Thanks Trilemma. I did do all of the compound eye drops pre and post surgery for 3 weeks. I am not going to a optometrist at this point unless my new 4th doctor recommends it. But I appreciate your suggestions.

  • Edited

    It would help if we knew where you were located. If you're anywhere near one of the top eye hospitals, that's where I'd try to get an appointment.

    • Posted

      Thanks Bookwoman. I am in the Southeast USA. I was going to go to Wills Eye in Philadelphia but decided it was easier to fly to a Mayo Clinic doctor in Florida.

  • Edited

    The most important information you are missing at this point is the refraction (eyeglass prescription) at 5+ weeks after surgery. That tells you where you have ended up compared to the distance vision (0.0 sphere, 0.0 Cylinder) that you were targeted to get. It is best to get this refraction from an optometrist that is financially independent from the surgeon that put the lens in.

    • Edited

      It is best to get this refraction from an optometrist that is financially independent from the surgeon that put the lens in.

      Yes. Lay out the $60 for a good cause.

    • Posted

      thanks Ron --- The doctor/surgeon never discussed targeted vision with me or what he had hoped to achieve. He simply said my distance vision will be corrected with that monofocal lens and I will need to continue w/reading glasses. There was some vision test numbers from my pre-cataract appt with him but he never said what they meant. I just obtained them from my online portal account.

      They only checked my vision the morning after my surgery and said your eye is healing well.

      I am going to get all of this information when I see the Mayo doctor next week. He is objective and an excellent background. And he has all of my medical records.

    • Edited

      Besides a current eyeglass prescription the next most important document you need to see is called the IOL Calculation sheet. It documents the eye measurements, the intended target and the expected outcome with the lens power they use. Your can find an example of this data sheet by googling this:

      .

      IOLMaster 700 Quick Guide Printing Functions EN PDF

      .

      See page 5 of this document for an example of an IOL Calculation sheet. If you look at the right hand side for the OS (left) eye, you will see a Target ref of "Plano". That means a target of 0.00 D, or in plain words, Distance, as you were told. Then near the bottom are some potential lens powers that could be used to achieve plano. Two different formulas are being used to calculate what each power would do. One is the commonly used Barrett Universal II formula and the other the Barrett TK formula. They give different results and the surgeon has to decide which formula to believe and use. If we stick with the Barrett Universal the eye in this example is predicted to achieve a refraction (Ref D) of -0.05 D with a +11.75 D. Most surgeons in this situation would likely choose the +12.00 D lens with a predicted outcome of -0.22 D, or very slight myopia. This is to reduce the risk of going positive or far sighted.

      .

      If you had this sheet from your surgeon you can use the power on the card you got for the lens to see what was predicted as the outcome for that lens power. And, if you get an optometrist refraction (eyeglass prescription) you can compare what you got to what was predicted. If there was a significant miss, and that can happen, it would explain your less than crisp vision.

      .

      If there was a miss, all of this information is very important as it would determine what adjustments may be necessary to get an accurate outcome with the second eye. The other use of this document would be for your new surgeon to compare the eye measurements in the upper half to what they get when they measure your eyes. Some reasons for a "miss":

      .

      1. Incorrect eye measurement
      2. Less than ideal formula used
      3. Simple mix up where the wrong power was inadvertently used.

        .

        Keep in mind that this IOL Calculation sheet will be in your surgeon's computer, and may or may not be included in your "medical records". You may have to request it in writing to get it.

        .

        Hope that helps some,

    • Posted

      You are so smart Ron. That is such helpful information. It really helps me understand everything a whole lot more. Now trying to get my doctor to release his sheet but I know he has to by law. So I guess I will first try going through their Health Portal. That should be interesting.

      I thank you very much and will let you and everyone know how it goes. I really appreciate it.

    • Posted

      One more thing, is that was is called a Manifest Refraction? My file has numbers in two areas. One says Manifest Refraction and the other Manifest Refraction #2 (Auto).

      I'm just wondering if they do the IOL calculations manually and also with a computer program. Or just solely a computer?

      I also don't understand how they determine approval for cataract surgery. The nurse told me they include glare testing and I believe keratometry. The glare testing brought my 20/20 vision in my left eye to 20/80. This was of course done prior to my surgery.

    • Edited

      Manifest refraction is just your glasses prescription which is determined by looking through a phoropter and the optometrist says "1 or 2" etc. It can also be determined by that machine where you just look at an air balloon or barn or something (autorefractor). The word manifest just means the test was done without any drops or dilation that could affect the result.

      .

      A refraction isn't how they determine IOL lens power choice though. IOL power is primarily determined by axial length (how long your eye is). A machine called an IOL Master measures this as well as a host of other variables (angle K, cornea thickness, etc.) and plugs all that (plus the a-constant of various lens options) into a computer which outputs a list of lens options and their predicted outcomes. Typically the surgeon will choose the predicted outcome that is closest to plano or one notch / minus below plano (20/20 uncorrected distance vision). For this machine you just look at a light and keep still and it only takes a second. It's not really possible to just guess at IOL power or do it manually by just looking at you or doing an eye exam. You need this scan and all surgeons do this scan.

      .

      I'm not sure what you mean by approval for cataract surgery. It's such a low risk procedure now that you can pay to get it done even if you don't have cataracts at all. They call that refractive lens exchange but it's the same surgery. The decision to have surgery is 100% your own. The only difference would be who pays. If you don't have a cataract (or if you do but you want a fancy expensive multifocal lens) then insurance (or public health in Canada) won't pay for it. If you have a cataract that is affecting your vision then you can typically get a monofocal or eyhance for free (or a nominal fee) through insurance or public health.

      .

      All of that aside I will say again, you should go to your local glasses store and get an eye exam for a glasses prescription. This will tell you if your issues are due to the IOL power or something else. You need an optometrist for that. It's not really something that surgeons do or would even necessarily be any good at doing. It's not their thing.

    • Edited

      It's such a low risk procedure now that you can pay to get it done even if you don't have cataracts at all.

      There is the rub. If you you wont pay $60 for an independent refraction, ....

    • Edited

      One quick and dirty test that has a long history, but is still used today is called the pinhole test. The optometrist will hold a paddle with one or more small pinholes in it, in front of your eye while you are looking at the eye chart. If your vision improves when looking through the pinhole then your refraction is off. The pinhole improves your depth of focus and if the refraction is off then vision will correspondingly improve. If refraction is not the problem then there is no improvement. You could do this test at home with a hole in a piece of paper and an eye chart at 20 feet or so. The ideal hole size is about 1.2 mm. Google pinhole eye test for more information.

    • Posted

      thank you RonAKA - they did the pinhole test on me the other day at the 3rd ophthalmologist -- and yes my vision did improve in that eye.

      BTW - I just received the IOL calculation sheets from my doctor . Shocked it was so fast. He used Lenstar. I haven't looked at the numbers yet.

    • Posted

      This is very good information thank you David. I have learned so much from kind folks like you in this forum -- a lot more than from my doctors -- (or my extensive online research ). If I had had this information from the start I wouldn't have so many questions. My doctor never discussed targeted distance vision, etc. etc.

      I thought I had read somewhere that the doctor should do a manual ( by hand) IOL formula as well as a computer / automatic generated formula. What did doctors do before all of these fancy computer programs?

      My ophthalmologists are also cataract surgeons -- so yes they can do these tests but also their nurses/techs do them. Which I've often wondered if the numbers were off because the tech was SO rushed.

      Yes of course I will go to an optometrist in the near future. Right now I have to see what will happen next week with the Mayo doc.

      My question about cataract surgery approval meant --- how do they determine if you need it? I know I needed it but I was confused because my vision was 20/20 . And I know there must be more factors involved or no insurance company is going to approve 20/20 vision for cataract surgery. So I assume the glare testing made it obvious because then my vision was 20/80. I'm just trying to understand the components in the mix.

      Thank you for your help....

    • Posted

      I have no problem paying for an independent refraction from an optometrist and will do that next after I see the doctor at Mayo Clinic next week. I have inflammation which is also causing non stop burning in my eye. So medically speaking I need his thoughts on that as well. My doctors are ophthalmologists as well as surgeons. Thank you trilemma.

    • Edited

      The Lenstar instrument if it is the LS-900 is a credible device. The data sheet should still have the important data which would include the target, the IOL used, the formula used, and the list of lens powers along with the one actually used, and the predicted refraction. This information should be of interest to your new ophthalmologist. If they take the same measurements they can compare the methods, data, and predicted outcome for the eye to the actual outcome (assuming they also do the phoropter refraction test).

      .

      If you look at the line on the data sheet that has the lens power (from your card) there should be a predicted refraction outcome. This is the number to compare to an actual refraction test on the eye done now.

      .

      The improvement when you look through the pinhole confirms there was a miss in the power of the lens, but until you have a phoropter test you don't know by how much and in what direction (too near or too far sighted).

    • Edited

      "What did doctors do before all of these fancy computer programs?"

      .

      If you go way back, I think they simply removed the cataract lens in the eye, and did not replace it with an IOL. Then you had to wear very very thick glasses to correct the vision.

      .

      From the Dr. Hill site on IOL Power Calculations, he says that in 1977 when IOLs were available the state of the art method for calculating the IOL power was to add 1.25 times your eye refraction prior to cataracts to +18.0 D. So for example if you were near sighted and needed glasses with a -3.0 D correction the calculated IOL power would be +18 +(-3.0x1.25) or +14.25 D. This is a pretty crude method compared to today's many formulas.

      .

      The method that Dr. Hill has derived is called the Hill RBF 3.0 and is based on artificial intelligence where the outcomes of thousands of cataract surgeries (and growing) are used to derive the formula.

    • Posted

      Great info thanks --- I did read that pre-IOL they used non-corrective lenses to replace the cataract. I guess the corrective glasses used depended on the patient's vision pre-surgery. The glasses you describe sound like Mr Magoo's. 😉

      Years ago in the late 1960s, my grandmother had cataract surgery. Back then they did BOTH eyes at the same time. And they used sandbags on either side of the head to prevent movement. That would be movement of anything - including the whole body. It was done at a hospital. My grandmother was in her early 80's and died the day after surgery from a blood clot. Really sad and totally unexpected. So yes we've come a long way in spite of the risks today. I was just glad my surgeon didn't kill me. (bad joke).

    • Posted

      PS - I'm in my early 60's.

      My mother went to the Mayo Clinic for her cataract surgery years ago due to her concern about what happened with her mother. They did an excellent job -- one at a time -- she was thrilled with the outcome. In more ways than one.

    • Edited

      I have no problem paying for an independent refraction from an optometrist and will do that next after I see the doctor at Mayo Clinic next week. I have inflammation which is also causing non stop burning in my eye. So medically speaking I need his thoughts on that as well.

      I don't see how the data sheets will help.

      RonAKA suspects they can, but a refraction will be more to the point-- is your IOL correct, and how much is it off? I don't read the datasheets, but it seems to me that the datasheets would be more about figuring out what happened happened. The datasheets at this point would be useless in my hands.

      In your Mayo clinic, I think you should bring a note with some simple facts, and the fact that I would include is that plano (distance) was supposed to be the target (IIRC).

      I understand that irritation and infection concerns are your higher-priority things to address.

    • Posted

      I think the more information/facts that he has the better. He can figure out the whole mess. I sent him my records with a cover letter highlighting my issues.

    • Edited

      The datasheets are helpful in determining what was intended to be the outcome, and also diagnose what was the reason for the miss if there was one. What did the surgeon actually target? 0.00 D, -0.25 D, or -0.50 D? There may have been more than one formula used. With your refraction outcome you will be able to determine which formula was the most accurate in the prediction compared to what you got. And, even that formula may need to be adjusted for the second eye to get the most accurate result.

      .

      And with the eye measurements you can even dive into the deep end and recheck the calculations used by the surgeon. The Barrett Universal II, Hill RBF 3.0, and Kane formulas have on line calculators which will accept the measurement data from the datasheet. Then you will have more formula predictions to compare to what was the actual outcome.

      .

      If the overall objective is distance vision without glasses and reading vision with readers, it is not a disaster if there is a miss on the first eye. You just use that information to refine the target/formula for the second eye. If there was a significant miss then it is very important to determine the reason so it does not happen again on the second eye.

    • Posted

      Hey Ron -- I finally had a chance to look at the IOL Calculation sheet you referenced and then looked at my doctor's IOL Calculation. So he chose the Hill RBF w/target refraction of -0.08D with a 22.00 D. It says 22.00D on my lens card and a couple other T and B mm numbers on the right side (not sure what they are).

      Regarding this info you wrote in above reply:

      *If we stick with the Barrett Universal the eye in this example is predicted to achieve a refraction (Ref D) of -0.05 D with a +11.75 D. Most surgeons in this situation would likely choose the +12.00 D lens with a predicted outcome of -0.22 D, or very slight myopia. *

      Where did you come up with the -0.22D number?

    • Edited

      The Hill-RBF formula is probably as good as it gets, especially if it was the 3.0 version of it. However, I would suggest the surgeon made a mistake by selecting the 22.0 D lens with a predicted outcome of -0.08D. that is just very slightly myopic, and the more conservative choice would have been the 22.5 D lens which should have given you something like -0.30 D. The problem with shooting for plano as he did, is that if you miss to the plus side you could come out hyperopic or far sighted. That reduces both distance vision and near vision some.

      .

      In that example from the IOL Calculation sheet there are two columns side by side. One is the IOL Power used, and the column to the right is the corresponding predicted outcome for each power Ref (D). The predicted outcome for the +11.75 D lens is -0.05 D. Right above that the predicted outcome for the +12.0 D lens is -0.22.

      .

      Your situation is very similar to the example on a relative basis. Selecting a very slight negative is risky. Your eye refraction test when you get it done, will tell you where you actually ended up. This Ref (D) number is a spherical equivalent. That is the sum of the sphere plus 50% of the cylinder if you have any (astigmatism).

    • Posted

      Thank you Professor RonAKA -- I wouldn't be surprised if you were a doctor or an optometrist. Your information is invaluable and I really appreciate it.

    • Edited

      Thank you. The real test is what your eyeglass prescription is for the eye. That will determine if the power is off, or if there is something else wrong.

    • Posted

      Exactly. I had hoped to get there this week but something urgent took priority so next week hopefully. Thank you!

    • Edited

      These are the results from my Pre-Cataract Surgeon's IOL Calculation - in May 2023 and My Post Cataract 2nd Opinion Exam from Mayo Doctor November 2023.

      The formula/lens chosen by my surgeon was the Tecnis Eyhance DIB00

      Target 22.00/-0.08

      Pre-Cataract

      image

      Not sure if this exam includes my prescription for eyeglasses.

      Post Cataract - Left Eye - I still have a cataract in my right eye.

      image

    • Posted

      It appears you had an autorefraction test for visual acuity with the results displayed in positive cylinder format (ophthalmologist style). Your predicted outcome for the Left Eye was

      Spherical Equivalent:-0.08 D

      .

      The outcome measured with the autorefractor and converted to negative cylinder optometrist format is:

      Sphere +0.25 D, Cylinder -0.75 D, Axis 41 deg

      Spherical Equivalent: -0.125 D (sphere plus 50% of cylinder)

      .

      So, the Hill-RBF prediction was extremely accurate. If the +22.5 D lens has been used you would have ended up in the range of -0.40 D, and your vision would not likely be as good as what you have. I think the right choice was make for lens power. The issue, if I am reading these numbers properly is that you ended up with 20/40 visual acuity which is not great. The pinhole test improved it to 20/25 which would suggest if the sphere and astigmatism were corrected vision would improve. It is puzzling why you are only getting 20/40 with your spherical equivalent of -0.125 D refraction. This may be suggesting that the lens is not properly positioned in the eye. Don't know.

      .

      One thing however to keep in mind is that I believe there are some known issues with testing vision with an autorefractor when the IOL is an Eyhance. More accurate results would be achieved with a phoropter instrument (which is better, one or two?). Getting a full eye test is still worthwhile. But the bottom line is that if things don't look sharp to you, that is what really counts.

      .

      It is possible that you may have benefited from a low power toric lens to correct the astigmatism (cylinder). The lowest power available in the Eyhance (-1.50 D) may have been too much to use. However, the AcrySof IQ is available with a -1.0 D cylinder correction, and I recall the enVista comes with a -1.25 D cylinder option. Once you get the detailed eye measurements done for your right eye, the use of a low power toric should be discussed with the surgeon. Being left with -0.75 D cylinder is right on the margin as to whether it should be corrected or not. That said I have -0.75 D cylinder in my distance eye, and still get 20/20 vision with it.

    • Edited

      If I interpret correctly, your left eye refraction from your Mayo report (2nd image) was sph -0.50 cyl +0.75. Seems acceptable. In spherical equiv numbers, I would say excellent. I am thinking that was similar to what RonAKA ended up with. I think I feel more of a desire for close to zero cyl (astigmatism) than most. But certainly not the big miss that we had suspected. But somehow your visual acuity in the left eye is 20/40. That is pretty marginal. That has to be something other than the lens choice. Your eye pressure was below average, and it make me wonder if you have been taking drops to prevent advancement of glaucoma.

      .

      Ron, I interpreted the refraction numbers to be "Snellen" done by phoropter. Of course I am taking inference, and maybe it was not justified.

      .

      It seems to say that your right eye prescription was sph +0.50 cyl+0.75

      .

      Trix317, what symptoms remain for you on your left eye?

    • Posted

      Hi, well my eye still has very blurry vision all around --- at least I can wear reading glasses to correct it. But since I was told by my surgeon that the lens would give me good distance and I would only need reading glasses like before I'm not thrilled. Plus I had 20/20 vision before the surgery and just used reading glasses. But the pre-surgery glare eye test said that eye was 20/40.

      The Mayo doc didn't seem to believe this was an incorrect IOL calculation, but he said 10-15% of the time, the intraocular lens heals in a position that results in a residual refractive error. The surgeon tries to calculate the effective lens position (ELP) but there can be some variance in healing.

      Okay so translation is? I have no idea other than I'm in the 10-15% category and my visual outcome was not good. It could be the way the lens is sitting. Or not. But I will get my answers one of these days from the optometrist in town who is wonderful and totally unrelated to my ophthalmology group.

    • Posted

      So the target was essentially plano (spherical equivalent) and the autorefactor measured you at essentially plano… so on paper everything looks great but your line chart is 20/40. It's odd. It will be interesting to see if the optometrist can get you to 20/20 distance with glasses.

Report or request deletion

Thanks for your help!

We want the community to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the community are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the community is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.