English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I'm 45, with fairly stable powers of around -9 in both eyes. My doc advices that in my case lens replacement is preferable to Lasik since it prevents cataract possibility also. But is this method proven? By the way, can a natural lens be so easily replaced by synthetic lens?

2007-12-19 03:40:27 · 3 answers · asked by vsh b 1 in Health Optical

3 answers

In reverse order,
Yes, it's essentially standard cataract surgery, which is about as safe as it gets, but that doesn't mean totally safe.

The method is very established.
The alternate is to have an anterior chamber *additional* implant ("Insertable contact lens").
This preserves whatever accommodation is still present, but does leave future cataract to be dealt with should it arise.

If you have the lens *replacement* surgery, you are faced with the additional decision of whether to opt for multifocal implants trying to obtain adequate (good if you're lucky!) distance and near vision without glasses, or single vision implants with a probable better single focus but the inevitability of glasses for reading
(unless you are desk-bound, or an avid reader or craftsman, in which you can choose the reverse, with glasses for driving and television.)

As a high myope (up to -14.25) aged 51, I'm planning to hang on a few more years (as I still have some useful accommodation) and then have surgery for lens replacement, with single-vision implants. I haven't decided whether the target Rx wil be -2.50 or zero. I'm not convinced by multifocal implants as yet. I have large pupils and night glare would annoy me intensely.

2007-12-19 06:06:54 · answer #1 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 2 0

Improve Your Eyesight Naturally

2016-05-14 23:30:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

1

2016-06-20 01:04:40 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers