Thank you for your comments and honest feedback. What are the timings of words you do not understood and I’ll try to explain here in comments.

thank you for your support! what is your lens of choice? or IOL combination?

@@iol-adviser I haven’t chosen yet. I was considering LALs, but then got interested in Odessey. I’m wondering about a blend of the two now.

thank you for your comments. there is many options to mention - including ICL, contact lenses, multifocal contact lenses, etc..

For the lens of that type - none. To my opinion, Eyhance is the best lens among enhanced monofocals

@@iol-adviser sir but some people say or doctor says it compromise slightly distant vision or sharpness with slightly increased intermittent vision is it true

That’s great and not common. Where have you got this perfect service ?

That's the problem of healthcare worldwide.

it depends on personal preferences. I have talked to thousands of people and, believe me, personal preferences differs so much..

I’m assuming eyehance and synergy are two. Correct?

the best in class of enhanced monofocals is Eyhance for today

EDOF is a technology which as a result gives Increased (Extended) depth of field or range of vision, other words focal point is extended (EDOF) which gives a patient insted of 50cm of sharp vision let's say 100 cm of sharp vision - as an example

@@iol-adviser I understand that but that was not my question

sorry, but I do not understand your question - you said "I still don’t understand the difference between extended depth of focus vs extended depth of field?" - I'v explained. What exactly is unclear?

@@iol-adviser you did not explain the difference, at least I did not understand. Seems almost like the terms are used interchangeably. So in a nutshell, how are the two terms different? Thanks for getting back to me. Your videos have been helpful

depth of focus is physical measure of let's say sharp projection on retina. depth or field is a physical measure of area in front of your eyes, where you can see subjectively sharp

thank you for your comments,. yes, glasses will correct any remaining optical issues. the current trend is to reduce dependence of glasses with enhanced, toric and premium presbyopia corretcting IOLs

For your case I believe that bilateral Tecnis Eyhance will be the best choice.

@@iol-adviserthanks for the tip

Just wondering what the perceived difference would be going with the toric version as opposed to the non-toric version. I know that’s probably not a question that you can answer without specific examination numbers on the degree of astigmatism. But I’m sure it would cost more with the toric lens. Something I will have to discuss with my doctor.

Toric vs non-toric answer depends on astigmatism type, it's power and your individual perception of astigmatism. If it is a clear lens exchange, or your cataract is not too much affecting vision, you may try to simulate is by trial glasses to see if you (and how) react to residual astigmatism. Honestly, if it's low astigmatism like about 1D..1.5D it might be neglectible, but always better to try and to discuss with your doctor. Higher amount more probablt need a toric IOL, and of course, astigmatism shall be regular (refer to my recent astigmatism video)

@@iol-adviserthank you very much for the reply. I will keep in mind the things you’ve said when my consultation takes place in a few days. It’s very generous of you to give your time and knowledge here. Knowledge is the key to making a good decision.

as a nearisghted person you may discuss either mono-vision or both eyes calculated for near focus and distance glasses use.

thank you for your comment and sharing your experience with Tecnis PureSee. It's really great lens, the more I know about it the more I am excited.

many thanks for your support!

many thanks for your comment and support!

thank you. I am passionate about telling the truth about IOLs , which I know from inside for years. Happy to help!

Every eye and every case is different. Choice for one patient may not suite for another.

today I'd put PureSee bilaterally or PureSee + as an idea (my personal situation and my risks - PureSee for dominant + Odissey for non-dominant)

@@iol-adviser If we wear the Puresee lens on both eyes, how many cm will our close distance be clear?

@@atalayonline I can not answer about "cm to be clear" as it is very subjective. with that type of IOLs (increased range of vision IOLs, EDOF technology) you shall expect fucntional reading wich means able to read smartphone but will have to wear glasses for prolonged reading or small tasks as a basic expectations. Realistic near vision acuity will depend on many factors like individual eye optical specific, residual refraction, light conditions, neuro procesing and personal visual experience before the surgery

Hi! Thank you for the content, it's really helpful! Between Puresee bilaterally and Puresee + Odyssey, what would you choose and why? Are you planning to make a review on Puresee? Thank you once again!

Could you get more of these features you mentioned with the Puresee lens? Do you have information about Puresee lenses? If so, I wondered why you didn't choose it.

@@atalayonline I have no info about Puresee

I'm planning PureSee review next week I guess

Thank you for sharing your experience Alex. Eyhance + minimonovision with Eyhance or something closer to standard monovision at -1D with second eye with Eyhance is indeed a great combination, especially if that works for you ideally. Not for everyone, but happy that it works for you

@@iol-adviser Yes it works for me great, today I have 100-110% far vision and about 60% near vision - which may improve more as "near" eye was operated just 10 days ago. Eyhance (ICB00) on OS is +13,5D, OD is +14,5D, other parameters identical.

replied in your other comment

review again :) its about the case with unhappy patient after 1st multifocal IOL implanted due to blurred vision, double vision, etc.. and then it may disappear with second IOL of the same type

@@iol-adviser Thanks for your reply. The same happened to me.Dominant eye was left with -2D,good near(cel) and intermediate(PC) vision, blurry at distance (TV). Second eye non dominant was left with -1D, blurry near and less blurry intermediate , better distance(TV) than first eye. It seems that monovision is beeing used although non dominant is not Plano. Both eyes are fitted with Panoptix Torics.My second eye (-1D) was fitted 3 days ago. Will near vision improve?. The diference with the -2D eye is very pronounced.

-9D both eyes before IOL.

It's quite strange to see Panoptix targeted at -1D and -2D. Are you sure that it is the case for you? Why it's -1 and -2? Refractive error or it was intention to do so? Normally full range of vision IOLs have no benefits in setting to minus.. wher it was implanted?

@@iol-adviser The target for both eyes was plano 0.00 but they came out this way.The Dr. says that -2D eye has an irregular cornea, the -1D is more even.The -2D has a much better near and intermediate vision compared to the -1D eye .Would the same good near vision would have been obtained if Plano would have been obtained?. The fact that it came out -2D accounts for the good near vision?

thank you! In my plans for next release - to talk about monovision like standard monovision, minimonovision and micromonovision

Cab you see computer without glasses?

@@MuhammadAli-hj2fe Need glasses for computer but I buy blue light readers which should be worn by everyone using computer screens

with monofocal + readers it may be issue with intermediate, depends on the lifestyle

Which lens you choose

I stopped implanting multi focal IOLs. There are many patients in my practice who had cataract surgery done elsewhere with a multifocal lens implant and they still wear glasses. Some people hate them, and I have had to remove them in a few cases. There are also people who love them, the problem is you never know in advance who will and who will not tolerate a multifocal implant. I just can’t spend hours of chair time, trying to placate an unhappy, bitter, angry, multifocal lens implant patient. 99+ percent of our cataract patients have had a natural monofocal lens in their eyes since they were 45 years old and putting in a monofocal lens implant isn’t disrupting their life very much! They still have a monofocal lens but now they can see, that’s a pretty good deal. And I have a lot of patients in my practice who had a multifocal implant placed elsewhere and they never should’ve got it in the first place. They might have keratoconus, or be post RK, or have some macular degeneration. They might have irregular astigmatism or some kind of corneal dystrophy. There’s so many reasons why you really should not be putting in a multifocal in certain patients. There are lots of patients who are very glad they had them and spent the out-of-pocket money for them, but I can never figure out who in advance who those people are going to be so I just don’t do it anymore.