Question for you then based on your experience. I am facing cataract surgery and doing my research on how to proceed. Wondering if it's just our area, or everywhere. I have 6 close friends and immediate family members who have had this done within the past 2 years. Only two had the multi focal implants, but all six now require glasses. I initially had not intended to go the multi focal length route as I have worn glasses all my life and once tried contacts but was so uncomfortable without having glasses to protect my eyes from impacts that I could not cope with it and went back to glasses. So I intend to wear glasses under any circumstances. Have you seen this amount of folks still needing glasses in a short period of time after lens implantation?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Cataract Surgery and Photography
- Thread starter Blind Bill
- Start date
Neverlost99
Senior Member
My very good friend who is a high-volume cataract surgeon highly recommends the multifocal lenses and since he is just retired and still recommends him I know it’s not any financial bias on his part because I’m sure they make quite a bit of money on each lens. If you’re going to wear glasses because I’m probably going to do then monofocal is fine. The key is going to high-volume cataract surgeon and not some local yokel
So you don't have sore eyes for a week ?
After my own surgery, there were no sore eyes at all and I wasnt told to expect any. The supplied eye drops are meant to deal with that
. I removed the eye shield after just a few hours. Could see perfectly 
BillyBobSenna
Veteran Member
not that I remember. I think I sent to work the next day and was fine.
liopleurodon
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,708
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,185
I had cataract surgery on just one eye as a treatment for a different issue. Since having the artificial lens I can see slightly into the ultraviolet spectrum with that eye. It has the effect of making blacklights look bright as regular bulbs to me and changes some of my color perception as well. Many brown fabrics appear purple to the eye that had surgery. I can also see better in the dark with that eye and need to wear sunglasses when its bright out because I'm more photosensitive than before the surgery.
In regards to some advice for cataract surgery itself:
I paid out of pocket to have the Crystalens implant as it still allows your eye a small amount of focusing ability versus standard lenses which are monofocal. Your eye has a natural process called accommodation that allows you to focus by X numbers of diopters. As you age an your natural lens ossifies you lose accommodation and start needing readers. All artifical lens implants covered by insurance have no accommodation and will be fixed focal length. You can choose to have one eye set to distance/driving focus and another to computer or phone distance focus to minimize your need for glasses; this is called monovision. The Crystallens is unique and offers ~2 diopters of accomodation as its hinged and not fixed. This can give you the ability to have on eye set for "near" and another for "far" with enough accomodation in each that you don't need glasses. LASIK can be used to fine-tune vision post-op. Its likely the surgeon will want to wait for a year post-op to perform the LASIK adjustment as well. The Crystallens is what gives me the ability to see in the UV spectrum as well; its unique in that it doesn't filter UV light. This guy explains it well https://www.komar.org/faq/colorado-cataract-surgery-crystalens/ultra-violet-color-glow/
TL;DR;
Cataract surgery absolutely worth it, get a Crystallens.
In regards to some advice for cataract surgery itself:
I paid out of pocket to have the Crystalens implant as it still allows your eye a small amount of focusing ability versus standard lenses which are monofocal. Your eye has a natural process called accommodation that allows you to focus by X numbers of diopters. As you age an your natural lens ossifies you lose accommodation and start needing readers. All artifical lens implants covered by insurance have no accommodation and will be fixed focal length. You can choose to have one eye set to distance/driving focus and another to computer or phone distance focus to minimize your need for glasses; this is called monovision. The Crystallens is unique and offers ~2 diopters of accomodation as its hinged and not fixed. This can give you the ability to have on eye set for "near" and another for "far" with enough accomodation in each that you don't need glasses. LASIK can be used to fine-tune vision post-op. Its likely the surgeon will want to wait for a year post-op to perform the LASIK adjustment as well. The Crystallens is what gives me the ability to see in the UV spectrum as well; its unique in that it doesn't filter UV light. This guy explains it well https://www.komar.org/faq/colorado-cataract-surgery-crystalens/ultra-violet-color-glow/
TL;DR;
Cataract surgery absolutely worth it, get a Crystallens.
liopleurodon
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,708
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,185
The CrystalLens allows for multiple focal distances using your eye's natural accommodation process and doesn't have the optical issues the concentric ring style multifocals do. Did you consider one?
liopleurodon
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,708
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,185
When I had surgery soreness wasn't a problem; but dryness was. I took OTC preservative free artificial tears for a few weeks post op whenever i felt dryness.
Neverlost99
Senior Member
If it does not filter UV light you are hurting your macula. Wear UV 400 glasses at all times
Blind Bill
Senior Member
I had cataracts removed from both eyes in 2020. My right eye in early August followed by the left in September. No complications post-procedure. I recall the prep for the procedure took about an hour and the procedure about 15 minutes each eye. Prior to the procedure I experienced 'floaters' and went in to have them checked. The ophthalmologist assured me they weren't a problem and did mention that my cataracts were mature enough to warrant removal.
My vision when I was young was always excellent but I had noted a degrading over the last twenty years or so. It was while driving at night that I realized that the cataracts in my eyes were affecting me.
The lens type they used was AcrySofIQ by Alcon Laboratories. The power rating was 19.0 D (which means absolutely nothing to me!). Post procedure my distance vision has dramatically improved and I can see things at exceptional distances that I had lost the ability to see. Up close vision (less than 3 feet) is different and I need reading glasses (1.25x) all the time. The Dr. was honest with me about this during our consultation and so it came as no surprise. I bought two pair of Clic Readers (www.clicreaders.com) and they are my constant companions.
Regarding photography: Manual Focus assist on my Sony a7r iii has been a Godsend to my ability to shoot images. I have a hard time with just my readers achieving perfect focus so the camera feature has really been a blessing. BTW, 4/6 of my lenses are MF only.
Al
What he/she said - UV not good for eyes.
Albert Macfarlane
Senior Member
Cataract accounts for 50% of blindness globally and remains a leading cause of visual impairment in all regions of the world, despite improvements in surgical outcomes (WHO 2005). This number is expected to rise due to an aging population and increase in life expectancy. The surgical treatment of cataract is one of the most cost‐effective interventions in healthcare. The most important risk factor for cataract is age. There is relatively weak evidence that avoidance of smoking and exposure to excess UV light may decrease your chances of developing cataract.
No surgical procedure is devoid of complications. Long term follow up shows as many as 30-40% develop posterior capsule opacification which may require further intervention usually by laser. Other complications are less common.
In health care systems where cataract surgeons receive remuneration according to the number of procedures performed, there is always a concern that advice on how early to consider intervention may be biased. Perhaps the best approach in this situation is to consult a certified ophthalmologist who does not perform cataract surgery. This expert can also diagnose other pathologies which might influence the approach to cataract intervention.
Photographers might be interested that the painter Monet struggled with cataracts in his older years. Initially he refused surgery because of poor results in some friends, notably Daumier and Cassatt. Eventually he had surgery, which was moderately successful: he then destroyed several paintings where he recognized previous errors in color perception.
No surgical procedure is devoid of complications. Long term follow up shows as many as 30-40% develop posterior capsule opacification which may require further intervention usually by laser. Other complications are less common.
In health care systems where cataract surgeons receive remuneration according to the number of procedures performed, there is always a concern that advice on how early to consider intervention may be biased. Perhaps the best approach in this situation is to consult a certified ophthalmologist who does not perform cataract surgery. This expert can also diagnose other pathologies which might influence the approach to cataract intervention.
Photographers might be interested that the painter Monet struggled with cataracts in his older years. Initially he refused surgery because of poor results in some friends, notably Daumier and Cassatt. Eventually he had surgery, which was moderately successful: he then destroyed several paintings where he recognized previous errors in color perception.
mamallama
Forum Pro
Color perception is an elusive thing. I often wonder how do we know every one with normal eyesight perceive colors the same way. Does everybody perceive the color red the same way. Could it be that the red you perceive is what I perceive as blue? How can we determine that everybody sees red the same way?
OpticsEngineer
Veteran Member
The bigger problem with Crystalens is there is no objective evidence that it works. See the article linked to below.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23380415/
One can find many others with a web search on "Crystalens Accommodation Objective"
In the ophthalmic community, it is considered a huge embarrassment to the FDA that they approved the claims for the Crystalens. It was based on subjective feedback from patients who knew they got the Crystalens. Which is poor because patients, knowing they got something special, are highly motivated to read lines on a the "push-up card" as best they can, not admitting they can barely make out the letters.
The only way to avoid that confounding factor, if you are relying on subjective feedback, is for the patient not to know if they got the Crystalens or a standard IOL. I was at the medical conference where the results of that study were announced. One eye got standard IOL, the other eye got Crystalens. The patients did not know which eye got which. First, they announced the eye with Crystalens showed accommodation. And then they announced the eye with regular lens also showed the same accommodation. The room erupted in laughter. Wow, what a lens that it improves vision in the eye it wasn't even placed in.
After that debacle, the FDA came out with stringent standards for how an accommodating IOL would be evaluated in the future. Any new accommodating IOLs have to show objective improvement with instruments such as autorefractors or wavefront aberrometers. So far no IOL has been created that has met the objective standard. Also Crystalens does not meet the new objective standard, but it was already approved so the FDA leaves it alone and allows to be marketed.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23380415/
One can find many others with a web search on "Crystalens Accommodation Objective"
In the ophthalmic community, it is considered a huge embarrassment to the FDA that they approved the claims for the Crystalens. It was based on subjective feedback from patients who knew they got the Crystalens. Which is poor because patients, knowing they got something special, are highly motivated to read lines on a the "push-up card" as best they can, not admitting they can barely make out the letters.
The only way to avoid that confounding factor, if you are relying on subjective feedback, is for the patient not to know if they got the Crystalens or a standard IOL. I was at the medical conference where the results of that study were announced. One eye got standard IOL, the other eye got Crystalens. The patients did not know which eye got which. First, they announced the eye with Crystalens showed accommodation. And then they announced the eye with regular lens also showed the same accommodation. The room erupted in laughter. Wow, what a lens that it improves vision in the eye it wasn't even placed in.
After that debacle, the FDA came out with stringent standards for how an accommodating IOL would be evaluated in the future. Any new accommodating IOLs have to show objective improvement with instruments such as autorefractors or wavefront aberrometers. So far no IOL has been created that has met the objective standard. Also Crystalens does not meet the new objective standard, but it was already approved so the FDA leaves it alone and allows to be marketed.
Last edited:
No, we don't all see colors the same way. I've often wondered why traffic lights use red and green, when those two colors cause the most problems for the majority of people with color vision deficiencies.
mamallama
Forum Pro
I’m not talking about deficiencies. I’m taking about people with normal vision. Do they all perceive say the color red the same way and how can we determine they do?
- Messages
- 15,235
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7,708
That's what I did.
The dangerous time for that was when I had one lens replaced and was waiting for the other--my favorite painting, which is predominantly green, looked ghastly due to one eye having a yellow (cataract) filter and the operated eye was now clear.
Fortunately, I didn't destroy it, and after the second operation it looked even better than before.
Neverlost99
Senior Member
I used to sell YAG lasers. We could vaporize the period (.) on a business card without burning the card. Now that was a great focusing system
Neverlost99
Senior Member
Retina specialist are a great way to see if you need an implant!
tbcass
Forum Pro
I did not want to pay extra for multifocal. Before my cataract operation, I wore bifocals because I needed them for reading and minor near-sighted correction. Now I need them only for reading. I'm glad I did because my glasses darken in the sunlight. I always wear sunlight protection of some kind anyway.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum