Question:
I'm just wondering why eye surgeons don't opt to just
replace the eye of the lens (as in a cataract replacement)
instead of slicing the cornea?
In my case I wear a -9 contact. Would it make sense for
me to have the 'cataract surgery' and have my eye lens
(which I believe is +10) replaced with say a +1 implant.
Seems like cataract surgery is much 'safer' than slicing
the cornea in LASIK.
Anybody know reasons why or why not on this one?
Answer:
From my personal experience having LASIK done (though I'm no doctor and
have never had cataract surgery)-- replacing the lens would be a lot more
invasive than creating the flap. Apparently, there's a less than 0.1%
chance of problems with the actual flap procedure, and when there is a
problem-- it isn't that big a deal.
The actual microkeratome'ing of my left eye was really quick. I didn't
feel a thing- just pressure from the lid speculum and the suction ring
(my doctor doesn't have an eye tracker, but the suction ring wasn't that
bad to experience.) The healing from the incision was also extremely
rapid-- I don't know how long it takes to recover from cataract surgery,
but figuring 1-3 days for the lasik-made flap to heal up-- that's not bad!
Also, it is probably a lot simpler to do a lasik enhancement rather than
a cataract operation again.
A co-worker has artificial lenses from a cataract operation-- though they
didn't (or couldn't) put 20/20 lenses in the last time she had to have
them replaced. Which makes me wonder what the operating life of
artificial lenses really is...
