Presbyopia reversing on its own?

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by Tony Karp, May 17, 2005.

  1. Tony Karp

    Tony Karp Guest

    When I was young, I had very good eyesight.

    When I passed 40, I started to wear glasses to correct for farsightedness. As I
    grew older, the prescription got stronger.

    In the last two years (I'm 66), this process seems to be reversing. This has
    been confirmed by an optometrist, and now my old driving glasses are my reading
    glasses. I can drive day or night without glasses.

    The optometrist said that this effect may be a precursor of cataracts.

    Anyone know about this effect or where I can find more information on it?
     
    Tony Karp, May 17, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony Karp

    Dr Judy Guest

    Your optometrist is correct, it is called cataract myopic shift. Your
    presbyopia has not reduced however, it is your hyperopia that has reduced.
    As the lens in the eye ages it becomes more dense and changes refractive
    index and effective power. An increase in power means more myopia or less
    hyperopia, thus your driving glasses now work as readers. This is the same
    process that eventually results in cataract, cataract are a normal result of
    the aging process.

    For more detail:

    http://www.emedicine.com/oph/topic49.htm

    Dr Judy
     
    Dr Judy, May 17, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Probably is; the lens swells during the cataract development, shifting
    the refraction toward myopia or less hyperopia. Used to be called
    "second sight". Don't worry too much about it, but plan for a minor
    surgical fix within a year or two. I went through the process in Jan.
    and if I knew then what I know now, I'd have done it sooner. But be
    sure to go to a cataract specialist who does stitchless procedures under
    anesthetic drops only.

    w.stacy, o.d.
     
    William Stacy, May 17, 2005
    #3
  4. This certainly happened to me. The nonuniformity showed up by my seeing
    multiple images. I called it a fly's eye phenomenon because I had no better
    term to use for it.

    I still had remanents of this fly's eye image after implantation of a lens
    during cataract surgery. I still would like to have an explanation on why
    the multiple images were formed by the impland and why they went away with
    porperly fitted glasses.

    Bill
     
    Repeating Rifle, May 17, 2005
    #4
  5. Actually called polyopia or polyopsia, multiple images seen by one eye.
    I had very symmetrical triplopia (3 images) of things like head
    lights and streetlights when I was developing cataracts. They were kind
    of annoying but also kind of picturesque. Made a christmas tree 3 times
    more spectacular. I'm quite sure that mine were caused by disruption of
    the old lens nucleus along the embryonic suture lines because of the
    triangular symmetry of the images. Larger single disk lights looked like
    3 petaled flowers and tiny lights at a great distance looked like little
    3 bladed propellers. Mine were completely eliminated by the surgery, so
    could not have been corneal. Since yours persist (have you had surgery
    in BOTH eyes? If only one, you could be getting if from the unoperated
    eye), I have to assume you had some corneal damage. Hopefuly it will
    eventually heal.

    w.stacy, o.d.
     
    William Stacy, May 18, 2005
    #5
  6. I am beginning to believe this explanation. Before my cataract surgery the
    images formed a scatter pattern such as might be produced by a shotgun. I
    just now took my glasses off in a darkened room and looked at an LED on my
    telephone from a distance of about 3 or 4 meters. I saw multiple images now
    strung out in an almost horizontal line. I was able to reduce the number
    images by stopping my pupil with a finger. Putting on my glasses merged the
    images.

    As a further check, I took my glasses off and looked a a rectangular window
    on my computer monitor through the glasses. The window remained rectangular
    when the glasses were in there normal orientation. As I rotated the glasses
    along the line of sight, the window began to look trapazoidal as the
    rotation angle deviated clockwise or counterclockwise. This is just what I
    would expect if my cylindrical axis were close to vertical or horizontal.

    Bill
     
    Repeating Rifle, May 18, 2005
    #6
  7. Repeating Rifle wrote:
    I
    When you say "merged the images" do you mean it eliminated all the extra
    images? If so, then it is without a doubt your astigmatism. If not, I
    mean if they are closer together, overlapping, whatever but still
    multiple, then it is multiple refractions, true polyopsia and is due to
    damage to the optics, either corneal, lenticular or both.
    This is normal observation through cylindrical (astigmatic) lenses of
    any axis, not just 90 and 180.

    w.stacy, o.d.
     
    William Stacy, May 18, 2005
    #7
  8. There were more than two images without my glasses. It was almost a smear of
    discrete and continuous images. My glasses merged all these images so that I
    could not distinguish the merged images from a single image.
    Without my glasses, the image on the monitor appeared to be rectangular.
    Putting on the glasses change the clarity of the window but not its shape.
    From that, I conclude that the cylinder was lined up vertially or crossed.
    That is, oriented at O€ or 90€.


    Bill
     
    Repeating Rifle, May 18, 2005
    #8
  9. Does that mean the single image was clear, or was it blurred? If clear,
    it was just regular astigmatism. If blurred, and the blur is not
    correctible with spectacle lenses, it is irregular astigmatism or other
    kinds of aberrations that are not ever correctible with glasses.
    No, I'd conclude that the cylinder was lined up properly with your axis
    of astigmatism, whatever that might be. While it's true that oblique
    astigmatism corrections can distort shape slightly, especially when
    first introduced, it is minimal and unnoticed by most people, and
    oblique astigmatism is certainly not the same thing as irregular
    astigmatism. But then I think we're off on a tangent here...

    w.stacy, o.d.
     
    William Stacy, May 19, 2005
    #9
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.