Restor IOL v/s Monofocal IOL

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Me@Verizon.Net - 10 Aug 2007 06:16 GMT

Hello
Someone in my family is undergoing cataract operation and there is an option
to consider Restor IOL. This IOL apparently helps reduce probability of
wearing glasses after the surgery is considered an advanced invention in
this field. The side effects quoted are halo effect, glares and potentially
reduced vision/clarity at intermediate ranges.

So for someone in my family who has just presbiopia (reading only glasses),
is going for Restor an overkill or a good investment in eyesight? Of course
money is an issue but if one were to not consider that (its a matter of
one's sight after all), would be factors to consider a typical Monofocal
IOL?

I wonder what the group thinks!

Vish

Reply to this Message

Jane - 10 Aug 2007 13:12 GMT

On Aug 10, 12:16 am, "M...@Verizon.Net" <vdotthakkar@verizondotnet>
wrote:

> Hello
> Someone in my family is undergoing cataract operation and there is an option
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Vish

According to the EyeQ report on the 2007 symposium of the American
Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, sales of ReStor have been
on the decline. Some of the reasons mentioned include the associated
glare and halos, "Vaseline" vision, loss of contract sensitivity, and
the long (12 month) period to neuroadapt to the lenses. (An online
article in Eye World reports that about 10% of the multifocal
recipients NEVER neuroadapt to their lenses.) When asked which
multifocal/accomodating lens they would want in their own eyes, not
too many of the eye surgeons chose ReStor.

Online forums (such as Med Help International) are filled with posts
about multifocal complaints and horror stories. Personally, it's hard
for me to understand why anyone who has done their research would
choose ReStor (or ReZoom).

Reply to this Message