Aa
Need to hear from people who know about the Nanoflex
I am not even 30 and need cataract surgery in both eyes, so getting this right is very very important to me. I don;'t think I would be happy with any of the commonly used options, so I'm looking into lesser known ones.
The Nanoflex IOL from STAAR supposedly gave 100% of study participants 20/20 at distance (best corrected cuz they don’t always focus it perfectly) and 20/63 at near. That’s 100%, 75% of participants could see 20/40 or better at near. Supposedly when used for monovision people have 20/20 across the board. (instead of needed glasses for intermediate) Supposedly blended vision with this lens can be done in several different ways to supposedly give you perfect vision, no glasses, and you would not be able to tell that your eyes were not focused the same if done correctly.
100% of study participants could see 20/32 or better at intermediate. It certainly seems miles better than any monofocal, and pretty competetive with multifocals or crystalens with no drawbacks. The nanoflex is approved as a monofocal, but supposedly they are trying to have that changed to accommodative for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, this information comes from two small studies, both of which were paid for by the manufacturer. In addition, there are probably only 20 or 30 doctors in the country who offer this particular IOL. If it was as great as the study results indicate, I can’t imagine why it would not be the ONLY available choice for cataract surgery. In fact, I think everyone over 50 would be lining up to have it implanted for presbyopia correction as well. So, either it’s the best kept secret in the world, or the study results are not giving the whole picture. I want to know if doctors are seeing similar results in their patients, and I want to know if those results stay stable after YAG capsulotomy. There is a doctor in PA I think who advertises it on his website, but he indicates that he wants to operate on the dominant eye first to ensure crisp distance vision. He then talks about the possibility of doing LASIK afterwards if there is a refractive error. It makes me wonder if the power on this lens might be a little bit more difficult to calculate than with other monofocals. (It just seems strange that someone would advertise difficulties with power calculation in the same place they are advertising why you should come to his office and get “blended vision.”) I have called ten doctors who offer this lens so far, and have written emails to two. Both emails were not replied to. Most calls were not answered. In one office the person answering the phone insisted it was a monofocal and two pairs of glasses would be necessary. In another they stated it was FDA approved as a monofocal, but when pressed she then indicated that patients could usually read around J5 (light reading glasses only, if any at all) and then politely reminded me that it was a monofocal. In one office, office staff actually called me back two days later to inform me that the doctor would not be returning my call unless I wished to travel 500 miles to come in for a consultation. Nobody permitted me to speak with a doctor who had experience with the lens, and nobody was able to answer my questions.
The Nanoflex IOL from STAAR supposedly gave 100% of study participants 20/20 at distance (best corrected cuz they don’t always focus it perfectly) and 20/63 at near. That’s 100%, 75% of participants could see 20/40 or better at near. Supposedly when used for monovision people have 20/20 across the board. (instead of needed glasses for intermediate) Supposedly blended vision with this lens can be done in several different ways to supposedly give you perfect vision, no glasses, and you would not be able to tell that your eyes were not focused the same if done correctly.
100% of study participants could see 20/32 or better at intermediate. It certainly seems miles better than any monofocal, and pretty competetive with multifocals or crystalens with no drawbacks. The nanoflex is approved as a monofocal, but supposedly they are trying to have that changed to accommodative for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, this information comes from two small studies, both of which were paid for by the manufacturer. In addition, there are probably only 20 or 30 doctors in the country who offer this particular IOL. If it was as great as the study results indicate, I can’t imagine why it would not be the ONLY available choice for cataract surgery. In fact, I think everyone over 50 would be lining up to have it implanted for presbyopia correction as well. So, either it’s the best kept secret in the world, or the study results are not giving the whole picture. I want to know if doctors are seeing similar results in their patients, and I want to know if those results stay stable after YAG capsulotomy. There is a doctor in PA I think who advertises it on his website, but he indicates that he wants to operate on the dominant eye first to ensure crisp distance vision. He then talks about the possibility of doing LASIK afterwards if there is a refractive error. It makes me wonder if the power on this lens might be a little bit more difficult to calculate than with other monofocals. (It just seems strange that someone would advertise difficulties with power calculation in the same place they are advertising why you should come to his office and get “blended vision.”) I have called ten doctors who offer this lens so far, and have written emails to two. Both emails were not replied to. Most calls were not answered. In one office the person answering the phone insisted it was a monofocal and two pairs of glasses would be necessary. In another they stated it was FDA approved as a monofocal, but when pressed she then indicated that patients could usually read around J5 (light reading glasses only, if any at all) and then politely reminded me that it was a monofocal. In one office, office staff actually called me back two days later to inform me that the doctor would not be returning my call unless I wished to travel 500 miles to come in for a consultation. Nobody permitted me to speak with a doctor who had experience with the lens, and nobody was able to answer my questions.
LOL - I have done that a lot, not just toys; I have bought stuff from supermarket shelf when I didn't have my glasses and only found out when I got home.
Nope.
But, reading between the lines, if an IOL was truly wonderful, why would they stop offering it?
Other than patient dissatisfaction.
But, reading between the lines, if an IOL was truly wonderful, why would they stop offering it?
Other than patient dissatisfaction.
According to my surgeon, B&L (among others) is now recommending YAG be done as a preventive measure at 3 - 6 months. This supposedly eliminates the problem of IOL damage (pitting, cracking, etc) which happens when the laser beam has to be more powerful because of the clouding.
And, contrary to the ads, the NanoFlex is just as susceptible to PCO as silicon lenses.
When I tried to find more information on the NanoFlex while looking at lens options last year, I was told by 3 different ophthalmologists that they no longer implanted this lens. And these were ophthalmologists from the NanoFlex "Find A Surgeon" link on their website.
So, agreeing with joojeh, I would be very careful about believing the manufacturer's hype.
And, contrary to the ads, the NanoFlex is just as susceptible to PCO as silicon lenses.
When I tried to find more information on the NanoFlex while looking at lens options last year, I was told by 3 different ophthalmologists that they no longer implanted this lens. And these were ophthalmologists from the NanoFlex "Find A Surgeon" link on their website.
So, agreeing with joojeh, I would be very careful about believing the manufacturer's hype.
Hi OneEyedJill
No I am not a medical professional, but a potential cataract patient like yourself. Actually I just have the beginnings of cataracts and may not need surgery for many years to come but decided to go ahead with surgery anyway to address my presbyopia as I now need 3 different prescriptions for near, intermediate, and distance.
Regarding monovision, both surgeons may have given you the right answer from their perspective. I did a lot of research online and talked to my surgeon about it. The dominant eye is normally adjusted for distance and the non-dominant eye for near. The degree of myopia they introduce in the non-dominant eye determines the final outcome with regards to intermediate (computer) versus reading fine print text. The majority opinion out there seems to indicate no more than -1.25 Diopters of myopia in the non dominant eye. This should give you very good intermediate results but you may need readers for sustained reading or for very small text. You can of course introduce more than -1.25D in the non-dominant eye (e.g. -2.0D) to improve near vision for reading but this may impact your intermediate vision and will also have other side effects for your distance vision (loss of stereo vision). Here is a useful online link for you to read:
http://bmctoday.net/crstoday/pdfs/crst0613_F_Barrett.pdf
I was initially going to opt for monovision but I tried it with contact lenses first. I found that my distance vision was good and also computer and close reading was OK for short time but I preferred my spectacles for continued use. Maybe the result is much better with cataract/laser surgery than contact lens trial. I have several friends who have had the procedure done with laser and are delighted with it.
Regarding the specific material that the Nanoflex lens is made of in order to prevent PCO (posterior capsule opacification) I can't comment. This is also one of my concerns but all the reference materials I have seen dismiss it as a non-serious complication and say a simple YAG laser procedure fixes it. I tried to find what percentage of cataract procedures do result in PCO and solid figures are hard to come by, but I have seen 20% mentioned and this seems to have come down over many years - I read in the early days it was as high as 50%. I would personally not go with the hype on a manufacturer's web site, and prefer to choose an excellent/experienced surgeon close to my home. There seems to be many factors affecting PCO (including how good a job the surgeon does to remove all the natural lens material during surgery) so the lens material may be just one element that may or may not have a significant contribution to the final outcome.
Anyhow good luck in your quest to get some answers regarding Nanoflex lens.
No I am not a medical professional, but a potential cataract patient like yourself. Actually I just have the beginnings of cataracts and may not need surgery for many years to come but decided to go ahead with surgery anyway to address my presbyopia as I now need 3 different prescriptions for near, intermediate, and distance.
Regarding monovision, both surgeons may have given you the right answer from their perspective. I did a lot of research online and talked to my surgeon about it. The dominant eye is normally adjusted for distance and the non-dominant eye for near. The degree of myopia they introduce in the non-dominant eye determines the final outcome with regards to intermediate (computer) versus reading fine print text. The majority opinion out there seems to indicate no more than -1.25 Diopters of myopia in the non dominant eye. This should give you very good intermediate results but you may need readers for sustained reading or for very small text. You can of course introduce more than -1.25D in the non-dominant eye (e.g. -2.0D) to improve near vision for reading but this may impact your intermediate vision and will also have other side effects for your distance vision (loss of stereo vision). Here is a useful online link for you to read:
http://bmctoday.net/crstoday/pdfs/crst0613_F_Barrett.pdf
I was initially going to opt for monovision but I tried it with contact lenses first. I found that my distance vision was good and also computer and close reading was OK for short time but I preferred my spectacles for continued use. Maybe the result is much better with cataract/laser surgery than contact lens trial. I have several friends who have had the procedure done with laser and are delighted with it.
Regarding the specific material that the Nanoflex lens is made of in order to prevent PCO (posterior capsule opacification) I can't comment. This is also one of my concerns but all the reference materials I have seen dismiss it as a non-serious complication and say a simple YAG laser procedure fixes it. I tried to find what percentage of cataract procedures do result in PCO and solid figures are hard to come by, but I have seen 20% mentioned and this seems to have come down over many years - I read in the early days it was as high as 50%. I would personally not go with the hype on a manufacturer's web site, and prefer to choose an excellent/experienced surgeon close to my home. There seems to be many factors affecting PCO (including how good a job the surgeon does to remove all the natural lens material during surgery) so the lens material may be just one element that may or may not have a significant contribution to the final outcome.
Anyhow good luck in your quest to get some answers regarding Nanoflex lens.
I also meant to say your surgeon can achieve blended mono vision with any mono focal lens. You should discuss this option with your surgeon as not every one can tolerate the effect of one eye set for distance and the other for near. Generally though most people achieve good outcome for far, intermediate, and near vision, but may need readers for sustained reading of small print or in low light conditions.
I looked up Nanoflex on their web site and it is just a mono focal IOL. If you don't have a requirement for a premium multifocal IOL, then there are plenty of mono focal IOLs on the market and your surgeon is most likely to recommend an aspheric type. You should expect good results from any well known aspheric lens manufacturer. I don't see that Nano flex offers anything unique. Most people go for power optimised for distance vision and will most likely need reading glasses. Some people who do a lot of close up work opt for near focal point in which case they may need to wear glasses for distance.
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Eye Care Community
Top General Health Answerers
Kansas City, MO
Grand Prairie, TX
San Diego, CA
Discharge often isn't normal, and could mean an infection or an STD.
In this unique and fascinating report from Missouri Medicine, world-renowned expert Dr. Raymond Moody examines what really happens when we almost die.
Think a loved one may be experiencing hearing loss? Here are five warning signs to watch for.
When it comes to your health, timing is everything
We’ve got a crash course on metabolism basics.
Learn what you can do to avoid ski injury and other common winter sports injury.
