Crystalens vs. ReZoom

[johntwong]

I am a professional photographer and do a lot of computer work with my digital photography. I also enjoy playing tennis. My doctor has recommended crystalens because it does not have the halo effect, but I've read in this forum that there is too much conjecture about this lense. Also with all of the computer work I do  I wonder if I might be more suited for the ReZoom lense inspite of it's Halo effect.  I'd appreciate feedback and other's recommendations.  Thanks
Concernedphotographer

[IgotCrystalens]

Who said you won't have halos with Crystalens? I have Crystalens in both eyes and have what I call the "horrible halos" or "halo hell". This occurs only in certain lighting situations, like low light conditions where the pupils are dilated and the light sources are rather weak, e.g. when driving at night outside of the city or when street light intensity is low, I see halos around headlights and taillights of cars. Also, when I get up in middle of night (yes, I'm an older guy and nature calls at the most inconsiderate times) then all the little LED lights on phone, microwave, radios, etc. will cause halos.

I have a Crystalens with "square edge" technology, which I have wondered was experimental at that time since the company (Eyeonics) sent a rep to attend all the operations and the follow-up exams. I find it hard to believe they would do this unless the lenses I got were not the standard issue. The model number is AT-50SE.

Overall, I am glad to have clear vision again but doubt that I would spend the additional $3600 ($1800 per eye) over and above what Medicare paid for the Crystalens.  Both my brother and brother-in-law had the standard lens and it seems to me that their outcome is as good as mine. I use +1.50 readers for computer work and reading.

Best of luck on your outcome, whatever you decide.

Sincerely,
Bob

[John C Hagan III, MD, FACS, FAAO]

In a recent eye symposium in a show of hands in a crowd of about 150 + ophthalmic surgeons none would have ReZoom put in both eyes and almost none would accept one in any circumstance  first choice Monofocal aspheric IOL,  second Crystalens  thrid ReStor  dead last ReZoom

JCH III MD

[cdn_glenn]

I'm not a fan of using a single multifocal IOL, and am under the impression they work better in pairs.  As mentioned by JodieJ the ReZoom has proved to be the worst multifocal for halos and other low light issues.  Put ReZoom in the Search MedHelp line in the upper right-hand corner of this page to see all the unsatisfied recipients.

Regarding using a single Crystalens, there hasn't been that much discussion on MedHelp regarding a single accommodative IOL.  It sounds like a reasonable option for one eye.  There was a new model of the Crystalens 5-0 released in November 2006.  Because this is an accommodative IOL there will be an adjustment period when your eye gets used to controlling the lens.  Initially accommodation may be limited, and you risk not being able to adjust to the lens.

Article from Opthalmology Management:
http://www.ophmanagement.com/article.aspx?article=100570

Google search for Crystalens 5:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Crystalens+5&btnG=Search&meta=

Using an aspheric monofocal IOL seems to be the sure thing.  Extremely low chance of halos and no adjustment time.  However, it means you might need reading glasses for computer work.

Good luck!

[JodieJ]

If you've been reading this forum, you'd know that ReZoom places dead last in the independent research investigating the merits of the multifocal/accommodating lenses.  Reportedly, none of the cataract surgeons surveyed would want this IOL in their own eyes (although a few would get the Crystalens).  Probably your best bet (especially if you are a photographer) would be aspheric monofocal lenses set with a slight monovision effect.  (See www.tecnisiol.com)   I suggest that you do more research before making a decision.  The archives of this forum has a wealth of info.