I think that any ph;ysician that takes the time to look at the choices available is doing a terrible disservice by continuing to use the ReZoom IOL. In my personal opinion it should be withdrawn from the market.
Having found this forum months too late( just this weekend) what now with a ReZoom? Had the surgery in May---first one lens--then they replaced it. I should have gotten off the table and cancelled the surgery when the anesthesist said " Why are you getting a ReZoom?"" They later did a jag saying that would clear "cloudiness". It stirred up the vitreous and they did send me to a fine Retinal Opthalmologist who said retina is fine--but he is watching and has had me back once--another appointment upcoming. Office techs said they see the results of IOL surgery all the time.
Had the ReZoom at the "sound" advice of a hotshot young surgeon who had done "hundreds" and said I would not need glasses. Three weeks later he went in to replace the first ReZoom with another--saying I was vastly 'over-corrected'. I still think they did not measure well the first time. Yes the lens was implanted in the perfect place--but my excellent distance vision is gone, My rather gentle myopia ( at 66 I often did not wear glasses-vanity-and can drive, see the stage, all but read find print) has turned into a huge blur. Not even metioning halos, etc.
What do I do now?
A third incursion into my eye is not something I want. With the jag I know it is difficult--and how would a plain single vision lens work?
They ( the eye group) did give me back the money for the lens and buy me two pairs of glasses,,,neither of which I yet have.
I hear their are doctors in LA who can "fix" the ReZoom--but at my expense?
A major eye clinic in Arizona has made this error and I have been told they are no longer doing the ReZoom. None of their other surgeons are willing to look at my eye--and I have lost confidence to say the least. I am not a litigious person, but this lens and this clinic are bringing me close to a decision to sue.
Sorry this is so long--but it is my EYE and I am into the 5th month with this.I also read this back and it is very scattered--seeing the computer well is another thing that has gone! ( and perhaps a bit of my mind!)
Thanks so much!
It's a disgrace that patients are placed in a position of choosing an IOL based on videos filled with the manufacturers' biased and inflated claims. Worse yet are the surgeons who continue to implant lenses known to cause horrible problems when there are better alternatives available. And even some patients who are (more or less) pleased with their multifocal IOLs post surgery were not given basic information about these lenses beforehand (e.g., that all multifocals--even the aspheric ones--produce a loss of contrast sensitivity due to the light sharing inherent in their design.) Without doing independent research, it's simply not possible for these patients to make an informed decision. IMO, all of this serves to undermine the doctor/patient relationship, and it represents a change (for the worse) in the way medicine is practiced.
It made me very sad to hear your story.
At what point does the FDA get involved to pull these inferior products off the market?
I feel the Agency also needs to take a look at how these companies market to doctors. I'm sure some form of "kickback" is provided by these manufacturers/drug companies, in addition to the usual complementary luncheons, for using their products.
As a Pharmacist, it disgusts me when drug representatives come to me when I'm working to market their products. First of all, I'm too busy to listen to their hype, and second, I'd much rather form my own opinion on products based on what know, and interpret the information myself. I don't need them to do it for me.
Best of luck StormysMom.
A devise is pulled from the market either voluntarily and/or by the FDA when it becomes abundantly clear that the complication rate is unacceptably high compaired with other like products.
My research in the 80/s led to the IOLAB Azar 91Z IOL being removed from the market because of design and manufacturing complications. I believe that the ReZoom should also be removed and will as other have problems with this iol (the ReZoom).