"sdavies6" <sdavies6[at]nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:OaBXg.6408$F87.5396[at]news-wrt-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com...
- quote -

I don't know who your doc is, but AFAIK most cataract surgeons and retina
specialists wouldn't agree with her.

I must disagree with that. It is well known that phaco with iol implant
is a significant risk to myopes. Of course myopes are at risk for
retinal detachment generally, but that risk is DEFINITELY increased
during surgery and for quite some time after surgery. Unlike the
posterior chamber lens, which carries little or no ADDITIONAL risk for
detachment. My own mother had a retinal detachment and giant retinal
tear DURING iol surgery. The reason for this additional risk has to do
with surgeon skill and retinal stretching from myopia, and the fact that
the ciliary body gets manipulated during the procedure.

w.stacy, o.d.

sdavies6 wrote:

- quote -

The IOL is the suggested procedure. I was talking about the lens which does
not replace the natural lens, but is added (usually under the iris). That
lens I understood was for those who still had most of their accommodation.
I may very well have a clear lens extraction on the one bad eye (minus 13 or
14). I'm just a bit weary as it is such a permenent and irreversible
procdure. Right now I'm trying different contacts to see if we can find one
which restores my vision and which I can tolerate wearing for long periods.


"Dan Abel" <dabel[at]sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dabel-6F2B80.18511712102006[at]nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
- quote -

You already lost accomodation, so why is it a poor move? Anyway, it's your decision and good luck.
"sdavies6" <sdavies6[at]nyc.rr.com> wrote in message news:HeBXg.2573$FV6.129[at]news-wrt-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com...
So, it appears that I was thing of the Visian as the posterior lens. The discussions I've had are that I will certainly have cataracts if I live long enough, and that's the primary reason, not the only one. Obviously, if it were a 50/50 proposition I would certainly opt for adding a lens than for remove my clear one. However, i'm told it is simply a poor move for a 56 year old who is already at a plus 2.00 for reading. Incidentally, the doctor makes the same money from either procedure, so it does not appear to be an example of a doctor pushing something for monetary reasons

In article <HeBXg.2573$FV6.129[at]news-wrt-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com> ,
"sdavies6" <sdavies6[at]nyc.rr.com> wrote:


- quote -

I'm 56. Exactly (until December anyway, when I turn 57). I have IOLs
in both eyes. I had cataract, which is why the surgery was done. If I
hadn't had cataract, I would have stuck with what I was using, which was
contacts for distance (-10 and -12), and OTC readers over them for close.

I don't understand your paragraph above. This procedure is a poor
choice for someone who has *no* plus. If you have lost your
accommodation already, I'm not sure what you have to lose.

Note that I am a layperson and don't understand a lot of things.

--
Dan Abel
dabel[at]sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA

So, it appears that I was thing of the Visian as the posterior lens. The discussions I've had are that I will certainly have cataracts if I live long enough, and that's the primary reason, not the only one. Obviously, if it were a 50/50 proposition I would certainly opt for adding a lens than for remove my clear one. However, i'm told it is simply a poor move for a 56 year old who is already at a plus 2.00 for reading. Incidentally, the doctor makes the same money from either procedure, so it does not appear to be an example of a doctor pushing something for monetary reasons.

"William Stacy" <wstacy[at]obase.net> wrote in message news:bOAXg.9840$TV3.991[at]newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
Pretty high, while almost zero for the Visian posterior chamber lens. Sure, someday you might need cataract surgery, but if I were -14, I wouldn't go for a clear lens exchange. The risk is too high for my comfort zone. If you do get cataracts, you can have both the Visian removed and the IOL put in at the same time, through the same incision (small). I don't know why they are not recommending it for presbyopes, unless they are pushing their own multifocal IOL which they probably are, which makes me sick.

w.stacy, o.d.

Charles wrote:

In article <nZmdnZAiyc2iSbPYnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d[at]giganews.com> , Mike Tyner
<mtyner[at]mindspring.com> wrote:

The results of CLE are pretty lousy if you don't get an intraocular implant.
"Clear lens extraction" is cataract surgery done for refractive correction.
Ten years ago it was unheard-of, and many old-school surgeons still won't do
it, but CLE is becoming more popular. And 56 is a perfectly acceptable age
for it.

What about the risks of retinal detachment for someone with high myopia?

sdavies6 wrote:
- quote -

You could stick with your -12 and get thin glasses with -2.75 and the
astigmatism correction to wear over.

Dr Judy

I just had retina exam from my doctor, and if I decided on the CLE it would
be a more vigorous exam by a specialist. My doctor told me there is no
higher risk of RD from the surgery for a high Myopre, than there is
generally for a high myope. She said high myopes have a higher instance of
RD than the general public, but statistically, it doesn't go up with the
surgery.


"Charles" <fort514[at]mac.com> wrote in message
news:121020061955584071%fort514[at]mac.com...
- quote -

I stand corrected. I was thinking of the Verisys, which is an implant. Of
course CLE is something I'm considering. I have heard that the Visian is
not a great choice, as it loses its accomodating feature in a year or two.


"Mike Tyner" <mtyner[at]mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:nZmdnZAiyc2iSbPYnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d[at]giganews.com...
- quote -

Pretty high, while almost zero for the Visian posterior chamber lens.
Sure, someday you might need cataract surgery, but if I were -14, I
wouldn't go for a clear lens exchange. The risk is too high for my
comfort zone. If you do get cataracts, you can have both the Visian
removed and the IOL put in at the same time, through the same incision
(small). I don't know why they are not recommending it for presbyopes,
unless they are pushing their own multifocal IOL which they probably
are, which makes me sick.

w.stacy, o.d.

Charles wrote:

- quote -