Posted , 7 users are following.
Which one would you choose for plano (no monovision) and why? Rayner EMV, Eyhance or Clareon?
Same question as above for near distance. Will Eyhance give intermediate and near instead or just near?
Thank you!
0 likes, 13 replies
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.
RonAKA aspen88
Edited
I have a Clareon in my near eye, and an AcrySof IQ in my distance eye. They are optically identical. A recent study by Alcon found that the difference in depth of focus between the Eyhance and Clareon was clinically insignificant. I have never seriously considered the Rayner EMV as the technical information on it is so sketchy it is hard to compare. If there is anything in it compared to a standard monofocal it is that it may have a slightly increased depth of focus to the left of the peak vision point. This has no value in the distance eye, but it may have a very minor benefit in the near eye as the defocus curve to the left of the peak comes into play.
.
Another lens you may want to consider is the B+L enVista. It has a bit more depth of focus than the Eyhance.
.
This said I would suggest the most critical factor in mini-monovision is the targets chosen and how close the surgeon comes to them.
aspen88 RonAKA
Posted
If you were doing it today with no monovision, which one would you choose? thanks!
RonAKA aspen88
Edited
Well I would not even consider going without monovision with a monofocal lens, and instead would go with a Vivity or PanOptix. But, I really don't like those EDOF or MF lenses either due to the optical side effects.
.
If I was forced to go with a monofocal for distance only I would select the B+L enVista as my first choice, and Clareon as the second choice.
aspen88 RonAKA
Posted
why not Eyhance?
RonAKA aspen88
Edited
There are some who have had good success with the Eyhance, but I think it is a little over hyped. One of the reasons for my choice of the AcrySof and Clareon is that they are blue light filtering like a natural lens. There is also some studies which have shown the lens is more stable in the eye, although that may be more of a concern with toric lenses. I don't think the Eyhance is available with blue light filtering, although I see some of there lense are now said to be OptiBlue, whatever that means. The Alcon lenses have also been found to be more resistant to PCO in some studies. That said I now have indications of PCO in both eyes! The Eyhance does not deliver significantly more depth of focus than the Clareon, and not as much as the enVista.
.
I also do not like the deceptive marketing used with the Eyhance. While they like to claim extra depth of focus they try to cover up the loss of visual acuity associated with what is required to do that. They claim the lens is aspheric with -0.27 spherical aberration, but I think the fact is that only applies to one side of the lens. With the other side they undo that effect by varying the power from the center of the lens to the outside.
.
Would I take the Eyhance if it was the only choice? Sure. If there was a choice then no. I certainly would not pay extra for it.
aspen88 RonAKA
Posted
thanks, Ron. what was your residual astigmatism that did not get corrected with toric?
RonAKA aspen88
Posted
I have -0.75 D of cylinder, but it is of the irregular type. I have the same -0.75 D cylinder in my other eye which also does not have a toric lens. In the eye with irregular astigmatism I get a drop shadow effect on letters, especially when they are white on a black background. I can still read quite well though, but it probably slows me down a bit. When I was shown what letter look like with a phoropter correction of the astigmatism compared to without it, there was a striking difference. That was the point when I realized I would have benefited from a toric IOL. It may not have been the perfect solution, but it looks like it would have helped a lot. But, by then, the ship had sailed although the surgeon offered to do an exchange to a toric. I turned it down.
Dapperdan7 RonAKA
Posted
if you wore glasses to correct for the irregular astigmatism, would that get rid of the drop shadow?
RonAKA Dapperdan7
Posted
Glasses with astigmatism correction do not entirely get rid of the drop shadow, but they significantly reduce it. The benefit is not enough to encourage me to wear them though. I enjoy being eyeglasses free except for occasional reader use. Months probably go by without me wearing my prescription progressives.
Lynda111 aspen88
Edited
There has been much discussion here about the Eyhance Some cataract surgeons say its overhyped, but many surgeons use it, and patients on this forum say they like it. Both Alcon and Johnson and Johnson have dueling journal studies. I was told by one cataract surgeon that the Eyhance makes it more difficult to correct astigmatism if you choose to wear eyeglasses rather than a toric Eyhance to correct the astigmatism. My own surgeon and I preferred the Johnson and Johnson Tecnis 1 because of its long track record. Her group only uses J&J products. Most cataract surgeons just stock one brand, As Ron said, the enVista is a very fine lens, but it's not as widely used as the other two brands. I know nothing about Rayner. Most Medicare and private insurance plans only cover monofocals lenses.
aspen88 Lynda111
Posted
Thank you, Lynda and Ron! I appreciate you staying in this forum to help out "newbies" like us.
aspen88 Lynda111
Posted
thank you, lynda. did he explain why it would be more difficult to correct astigmatism with eyhance? that would be a concern as I'd like whatever i choose to be able to see clearly with glasses.
Guest Lynda111
Edited
For what its worth, in very good light I can read J1 at 14" with my -0.125 Spherical Equivalent Eyhance eye (+0.25D Sphere, -0.75D Cylinder). Your mileage may (actually… almost certainly will) vary.