A family member had a Restor lens put in late last year (not the very newest model). She is generally quite happy with it. She knew there could be some glare and halos, and there are, but they don't really bother her. If she were going to have her other eye done today she would get a Crystalens HD, to fill in the intermediate vision and to avoid having two eyes with night-driving glare issues.
Personally I would not (and did not) choose the Restor, because if you are one of the people for whom it doesn't work, it tends to be really bad. Compare that with the Crystalens, where as long as it is installed correctly, a bad outcome more often tends to result in disappointment rather than hatred.
I am happy with my two Crystalens HD's, in spite of the results so far not quite meeting my expectations.
ReStor is still a multifocal IOL. Neuroladaptation and future macular problems are still present.
The new one allows you to see near at a more comfortable distance (not too close) and has better intermediate.
Consider a Crystalens HD. See some one who has put in more than 100.
Dr. O.
The problem with monofocal IOL's if they are set for diatance is that you will lose intermediate and near vision. Chrystalens HD gives good distance and intermediate and can give good near if you can make it accommodate.
The Restor gives good distance and near, but not so good intermediate. It operates by making a near and far image and the brain sorts it out. The newest restor extends the near to about 2 ft. I have one of each.
If you are not that myopic, monovision with two monofocal IOL's, one set near and one set far can be a good way to go. I'm fairly myopic (-6.50D) and I want good stereo vision, so both of my IOL's are set for plano and I have good far and intermediate vision and can read the monitor without glasses. I use readers for reading news print.
Thanks. I'm so confused. I think I will just go with the monofocal implant.
My opinion is still the same as it was in the older posts. Not good.