Wrong lense

First just a point of clarification. I take it you still got PanOptix lenses and the issue is that they were the standard AcrySof material and not the new Clareon material? Assuming that is the case I will offer a few comments.

.

First off I have an AcrySoft IQ monofocal in one eye, and in my second eye I got a Clareon monofocal. I paid an extra $300 for the Clareon, but to be frank my main motivation in getting the Clareon was to in effect jump the queue. In Alberta the Clareon is classed as a premium lens and it can be done in a clinic vs a public hospital. The extra $300 got me a lens in 3 weeks compared to many months or a year wait for the public system. That said, I think there are some minor benefits to the Clareon. The risk of glistenings is much reduced. But, the newer batches of the AcrySof material with improved quality control has essentially eliminated that risk in any case. At least in the monofocal the Clareon version has sharper edges and supposedly reduces the risk of PCO. On the other hand, risk of dysphotopsia is apparently increased with the Clareon version. To date I have had no issues with glistenings in my AcrySof lens, but I do have some positive dysphotopsia. So far, no issues at all with the Clareon but I've only had it 9 months, and the AcrySof one is coming up to two years. Overall, I don't worry at all about having AcrySof in one eye and Clareon in the other.

.

With respect to the blurry vision that could be a lot of things, but I sure would not suspect the AcrySof material as being the cause. I think the first thing I would do if you have not already is get a full refractive exam for eyeglasses to see where you ended up relative to plano distance. It is possible that there was a miss on the power for the eye that is giving you issues. An optometrist should be quite willing to see you and do the refraction. They should also be willing to give you their thoughts on whether the lens is located properly in the eye and if there are any other issues they can see. I would pick an optometrist that is not affiliated with the surgeon you had, just to ensure there is no conflict of interest.

.

If there was a difference in cost between the two versions of the lens it certainly would be fair to ask for a refund of the difference...

It's disappointing to not get the Clareon version but it's not worth the risk of an exchange just for that. If your concern is glistenings, that issue was essentially eradicated years ago. There may still be some glistening with Acrysof but not enough that you'd ever notice.

.

The refractive error is another issue. Have you gone to an optometrist for a refraction yet? Can it be fixed with glasses? If not you need to get a second opinion and find out what's going on. If drops don't make a difference then i agree it's not a dry eye issue.

Your in a bad spot. A lawyer is going to require a $25k retainer / down payment just to look at this. Did you notify the Dr. in writing or get anything in writing from him stating that the clarion would be used? If not, the lawyer not going to get anything done for you. He will, however, take as much money as he can.

Pull up youtube and type " glistenings " in the search box. Watch the first video ifrom Dr. Krad. Then watch ihe one from moran. Notice the " but I doen't affect vision quality bla bla bla " added to the horrifying pictures / video of thousands of glistenings in the iols. Are you going to believe them or your lying eyes? This would be laughable if it wasn't impacting millions of people ( Alcon has sold 100+ million of these lenses ).The photographers and videographers are going to be p****d. They have spent thousands and thousands of dollars on very high quality lens when they could have just bought cheap plastic lenses with thousands of spots in them and had the same image quality. Alas, there are crooks in every business it seems.

If you want reality, type "The subtle presence of IOL glistenings highlights the importance of checking for easily found problems first." into google search and carefully read it. Then read it again. The reality is that the " professionals " looked at these iols, pronounced them fine and dandy, told the patients it was in their heads, grabed the money and shoved them out the door. This is what 99% of the " professionals " will do to you when you have these same problems. Any slit lamp inspection of these lenses will show glistenings after a few years. How many YAGs have been done to get rid of cloudness that not only didn't fix the problem, but caused floaters, damage to the lens, retina etc. Opsie. And once again, tell them they don't see anything wrong, grab the money and shove them out the door. The forums are full of these stories. But wait, there's more! What if the Opsie is thick headed and actually wants to see? Since only 1/100 Dr will do this surgery, Opsie will need at least 4 things;

#1 =time . A willingnes to sit for hours on hold trying to find out if a Dr. does iol exchanges. The information that you get this way ( unless you talk to the Dr. himself (1/100 chance) will at best about 50% accurate. The people you talk to on the phone will have no clue what your asking ( a what? ) and will either say no just to get you off the phone as fast as possible, or, if they are not busy, put you on hold while they ask around the place to see if anyone knows if they do "some sort of exchange" They will come back to the phone and proudly exclaim " yes, we do lens exchanges!". ...Yeah....Only 99 more calls to go.

#2 = A credit card with $20k room on it. Trust me.

#3 = Willingness to travel ( planes, trains and automobiles ) multiple trips, multiple stays.

#4 = Luck!!! Bushell baskets full of it. I'm talking $5k scratch-offs type of luck. If the Dr. is very skilled, and there is enough bag left to put a normal iol in, you hit the jackpot. If he can't use the bag, and he has to pull out the needle and thread, then thats less jackpoty.