There are two issues obviously now at your age: the refractive error and presbyopia. Obviously a lens exchange is often what is suggested since that can tackle both issues. There are laser methods of tackling presbyopia, but surgeons seem to give them mixed reviews. If lasik were available for hyperopia that high (which I'm uncertain of, I think there may be techniques that not all doctors use yet to do so), there are also corneal inlays (lens implants that go into the cornea, instead of replacing the natural lens) like the Raindrop or Kamra which can be used to address presbyopia separately (and are usually reversible so if they don't work well you can take them out, unlike lasik which can't be as easily undone, though any sort of surgery has risks).
If lasik isn't an option for the refractive error, there are also implantable contact lenses (ICLs), or phakic IOLs which are lenses implanted over your natural lens. They are more reversible than a lens exchange since the lenses can be taken out if they don't work (but again still involve risks). I don't think there are any multifocal phakic IOL options to correct for presbyopia yet, but I'm not positive. Here are a couple of links mentioning them for high hyperopes:
http://www.eurotimes.org/node/1278
"Phakic IOLs can provide good long-term safety in high hyperopes..."
There are two phakic IOL models available for high hyperopia with or without astigmatism. They are the iris claw IOL (Artisan®, Ophtec)/Verisyse®, AMO) and the posterior chamber implantable collamer lens (VisianICL®, Staar). Both have undergone refinements over the years and have toric versions for the twothirds of hyperopic eyes that have astigmatism greater than 1.5 D."
http://ophthalmologytimes.modernmedicine.com/ophthalmologytimes/content/tags/abbott-medical-optics/phakic-iols-good-benefit-risk-ratio?page=full
"Phakic IOLs: Good benefit-to-risk ratio
Three different lenses, each with unique features, provide optical quality and fast visual rehabilitation"
If you do go for a lens exchange, I'd suggest getting an IOL recommendation from surgeons, but then researching them on your own as well (since there are some doctors that may be experts in surgery, but don't delve as much into the optics of lenses and go for what the sales reps push). I posted an overview of lens options in a recent thread here:
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Eye-Care/Cataract-IOL-selection/show/2586465
It is a reasonable goal to expect to be glasses free after lens replacement, but it isn't guaranteed. A trifocal is the best bet for being independent of glasses. The new Symfony lens is a almost as good a bet for not needing glasses except perhaps at near. The reason I chose that is because its intermediate vision seems likely to be better, and it seems to have better contrast sensitivity than trifocals (comparable to a monofocal), and lower risk of halo&glare (again like a monofocal). My visual glitch with reading isn't likely related to the particular lens. Its possible the fact that it isn't a monofocal might impact it, though another doc thinks I'd have had more trouble with a monofocal, its not clear. Oddly reading a smartphone is a little better than hardcopy in terms of flickering, I can manage to deal with minor bits of email&web, and text messages.
I had bilateral cataract surgery done a few months ago at the age of 52 with no other eye health issues and every reason to expect a great outcome, and surgery that went well. For the most part I had a great result, and the problems I have sound like they are rarer than 1 out of a thousand (possibly due in part to having been a high myope, or some other oddity of my eye anatomy, the exact cause isn't clear). This may still resolve with time, but at almost 6 months postop I have problems with reading at usual hardcopy reading distance due to flickering lights & text jiggling (though the text jiggling has mostly subsided). It isn't merely annoying, its headache inducing and I struggle to make it through a page of hardcopy. Fortunately computer distance for a large monitors is better and I'm finally almost able to function normally at that distance. I still get headaches that I'm hoping will stop soon. The odds are vastly against you having the problems I had, the point is that nothing is guaranteed.
Everyone's risk tolerance is different. I was highly myopic my whole life (-9.5D and -6D) but never thought the risks of lasik were worth considering, and wouldn't have considered lens exchange before I needed cataract surgery at age 52 a few months back. It is odd though since my attitude has changed after doing more research about vision issues due to my cataracts, despite the bad luck with the cataract surgery. I might consider a laser touchup if my visual glitch ever resolves to make it worth it. I'm only slightly hyperopic in one eye after surgery, and it would be useful to switch that to being slightly myopic for better near. (the risks are lower for small corrections and it seems a shame have been just a little bit off and be losing a bit of near vision, the odds of hitting the refractive target are a bit lower in high myopes than for most people).