Sight for sore eyes

Authored by: Post on Tuesday, September 05 2006, 12:12 PM EDT

This comment from Mark Malcolm.

Appreciate your article; however, it makes one major FALSE statement at paragraph 17: "And although the ICL looks like an attractive alternative to LASIK in many ways, it corrects for only one distance."

This is totally NOT TRUE. A phakic IOL works with the natural lens of the eye to provide vision through all ranges.

Drs. Weaver and Joshi by their statements are proponents of refractive clear lens exchange; that is, explanting the pre-cataract natural lens of the eye. This might be a viable choice for some people with presbyopia not wanting monovision with Lasik or PRK, using multifocal lenses that the FDA has approved only for those with cataracts. The Alcon Restor and AMO ReZoom use unnatural means to provide the multifocal capability, with compromises through one or more ranges of vision. The Crystalens (and in Europe, the HumanOptics) accommodating IOLs also are intended to replace a cataractous natural lens, and provide for vision across multiple ranges but in a more natural way than the Restor or ReZoom. Clear lens exchange in younger people is a risky choice as it increases the likelihood of retinal damage and blindness in later life.

For pre-presbyopic persons, generally younger than age 45, and I have a number of friends 55 and older without presbyopia, if contacts don't work, the ICL is THE SUPERIOR CHOICE.

That said, though Dr. Boxer Wachler is a significant advertiser of the ICL, he is also among eye docs (over)charging the most for ICL surgery.

Also, the satisfaction rate for the thousands who have had the ICL is greater than 99.4%; for Lasik only about 92% with an increasing number of persons facing corneal replacements as keratoconus (irregular surfaces of the cornea) develop as the cornea naturally thins due to epithelial cell loss with age. This condition is already 2x greater occurring in the US than the rest of the world, because of our high adoption rate of Lasik. This is a real disadvantage of Lasik and particularly waveform Lasik which weakens the cornea even more, that most Lasik physicians will not admit.

Me? I am an investor in Staar Surgical. I was a high myope who has had cataract surgery for both eyes with monofocal IOLs inserted so I must wear glasses to correct for induced astigmatism. I was a poor candidate for Lasik due to the degree of myopia I had, and I did not want PRK due to its slowness of healing and expected discomfort. I waited for 10 years as the ICL was adopted in other countries and improved, before the 5th generation ICL was approved for use in the US last December, but my eyes developed cataracts first.

[ Reply to This | # ]