Vivity ... progress after 3-4 weeks
Posted , 4 users are following.
Some good news and hope for others with Vivity IOL ... or who are not seeing as well as they'd hoped a few days after surgery.
As I mentioned in a previous post, I had a really bad couple of weeks after my first (dominant eye) surgery.
I paid $3,100 extra for the Vivity based on the many enthusiastic success stories: "20/20 vision at distance and intermediate + decent near vision the next day."
Unfortunately my initial results were far less encouraging.
The combination of a refractive error (+0.75, requiring -0.75 correction) plus a lot of fuzziness left me with no clear vision at any distance—near, intermediate, or far. This lasted two, rather miserable, weeks.
Fortunately, thanks to Costco I managed to get a pair of prescription glasses after the second week, which really helped with distance. But even with the glasses I was at 20/32-40 distance.
Then, one morning, after about 3 weeks, I woke up and—behold!—my IOL vision was MUCH better than before. I was at 20/-32-40 WITHOUT glasses. This may sound unacceptable to you, but for me was a big win. It did not last long, but midmorning I was back at pretty lousy and blurry vision.
No more improvement for the next three days, then another good vision morning. And then another. And the good vision lasted longer each time.
Right now, it's been a little over a month and at my last visit the dr. confirmed a refractive surprise of +0.75 (mild myopia). But unlike before, my intermediate vision was clear and much less fuzzy and with reading glasses and distance glasses I am at 20/20 both near and distance.
Bottom line: the speed with which our eyes heal and adjust can vary dramatically. My friend was good to go after 24 hours (actually, the very same evening) ... my eyes took not twice or even ten times longer, but about one-hundred time longer.
True, I did not get the 20/20 vision I expected or hoped, but once you have to deal with blurry and fuzzy vision at all distances with or without glasses, being able to see ANYTHING clearly feels like a huge win and a huge relief.
Now I'll take a pause of a few months and then I'll have to decide what to do with my other non-dominant eye ... and I think I'll diversify my risk and go with a monofocal set for distance which should minimize the odds for another refractive error. With any luck, I'll have mini monovision. ANY ADVICE IS WELCOME.
I hope my case brings some relief to other people who come to this forum in a situation similar to mine.
Don't lose hope, it may take 2x, 10x, 100x longer than what you read for your eyes to adjust and adapt.
A number of people in this forum were very nice and helpful with their advice and have my deepest thanks.
1 like, 11 replies
indygeo RandallG
Edited
Hi Randall,
I think at +0.75 you're actually hyperopic and not "myopic". In any case since your non-dominant eye remains to be done you need to ask yourself which end, near or far, you'd prefer to wear glasses.
Typically the non-dominant eye is set "near", although there is success as well oftentimes when the dominant eye is set to near particularly when the difference between the eyes isn't very large (say, a 1.0D difference or less).
I actually think you could still wind up in a situation where you're glasses-free most of the time if, say, you had better luck with another Vivity lens in that non-dominant eye or perhaps a lens like the Rayner EMV (which I have in one eye). I'm really happy for you in that you're getting clear vision finally with the Vivity.
IndyG
RandallG indygeo
Edited
Thank you IndyG.
I am actually myopic after the surgery (-0.75 is the correction I need in my glasses) but I was temporarily confused by the different way that optometrists report Sphere (for some reason, they use opposite signs.) I had never seen an opthalmologist or gotten one of their prescription until after the operation, so I was used to the flipped +/- sign and falsely believed that I was hyperopic since, for a while, I could not see clearly at ANY distance.
Much to my relief I am slightly myopic which I am told is easier to deal with than hyperopic in deciding on a second lens.
I appreciate your suggestion and I'll look into the Rayner lens.
Thanks again.
indygeo RandallG
Posted
Hi Randall,
Yes, understood about the confusion of these plus and minus numbers. Sometimes I'm not sure I understand it all entirely myself. You are indeed better off a bit myopic than hyperopic.
It does seem to me that things could work out rather well for you if you targeted your second eye for distance with the Rayner EMV lens. Please do some research on that lens because it may suit you. In my view, theoretically at least, you could target emmetropia or slightly less and have a high likelihood of excellent distance vision with maybe a 50% chance or more (70% according to a study) of functional reading vision. Check out the numerous YouTube videos on the Rayner EMV lens. Best of luck ylto you.
IndyG
RandallG indygeo
Edited
Thank you, IndyG
carol07114 RandallG
Posted
Than is wonderful news. Congratulations!
RandallG carol07114
Posted
Thank you, Carol. I am hopeful that your issue will be improved as well ... and with the amazing capacity of the brain to adapt and habituate I am confident that it will.
RonAKA RandallG
Edited
Slow recovery, but all in all not a bad outcome. Being 0.75 D myopic with the Vivity lens should give you decent intermediate and reading. I would go with a monofocal targeted to leave you 0.25 D myopic in the other eye. A monofocal like the Clareon will give you better contrast sensitivity and will make up for the lower contrast sensitivity with the Vivity. The surgeon should have learned something on the first eye, and be closer to the mark on the second eye.
RandallG RonAKA
Posted
Thank you, Ron. Your replies and expert suggestions really helped and I appreciate.
A couple of quick questions:
Why target for 0.25D myopic, rather than, say plano? Is it to minimize the chances of an hyperopic error?
Is Clareon considered a premium lens and do all ophtalmologists offer it?
Thank you!
RonAKA RandallG
Edited
RandallG RonAKA
Posted
Thank you, Ron.
That's what I thought. I am learning quite a bit from this experience and this forum.
The $300 extra for the Clareon sounds like a bargain compared to the $3100 for the Vivity. Having said that, I can see how without a significant refraction error the Vivity is well worth it if it allows one to go glass free.
Thanks again.
RonAKA RandallG
Posted
I believe we pay the differential between the basic lens (AcrySof IQ or Tecnis 1) and the so called premium lenses. I recall it was $300 for the Clareon monofocal, $1,100 for the AcrySof Toric, and $2,100 for either the Vivity or PanOptix. In Canadian dollars of course.