[HN Gopher] The history of cataract surgery
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The history of cataract surgery
        
       Author : mailyk
       Score  : 181 points
       Date   : 2025-09-29 15:04 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.asimov.press)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.asimov.press)
        
       | kvmet wrote:
       | I did some of the controls software for an automated IOL
       | manufacturing line roughly 8 or 9 years ago. It's very cool
       | technology, I was proud to work on it.
       | 
       | One problem at the time (at least from my understanding) was
       | actually that some people needed a second round of surgery since
       | people are living longer and cataracts are getting corrected
       | earlier. Last I heard, the rate of complications for a repeat
       | surgery is significantly higher, but I assume it is improving all
       | the time.
       | 
       | A fun fact: UV protection can be put directly into the lens to
       | protect your retinas even without sunglasses (I assume this
       | depends on the polymer type though). Also the lenses are usually
       | tinted a slightly yellow color since our natural lenses shift
       | color as we age. Patients tend to find it jarring if the lens is
       | perfectly clear.
        
         | rogerrogerr wrote:
         | Fascinating - I'd think your brain would compensate pretty
         | quickly for a no-longer-yellow lens? Given a choice I'd be all
         | for the clear one.
        
           | catlikesshrimp wrote:
           | They might, eventually. But the older you get, the more
           | difficult it is to adapt or accept change.
           | 
           | My grandmother was forced (by us) to get her cataract surgery
           | when she mistook a horse for a known person. She assured for
           | the rest of her life that she had better vision before the
           | surgery.
        
         | pantulis wrote:
         | > Last I heard, the rate of complications for a repeat surgery
         | is significantly higher, but I assume it is improving all the
         | time.
         | 
         | My complications apeared 2 years after the cataract procedure
         | but were solved through laser capsulotomy, not sure if you're
         | referring to that. But the capsulotomy is basically trivial
         | compared to the main procedure.
        
         | traceroute66 wrote:
         | > UV protection can be put directly into the lens to protect
         | your retinas even without sunglasses
         | 
         | Stating the obvious here but just to remind people about basic
         | eye anatomy....
         | 
         | The built-in UV protection does not remove the need to wear
         | sunglasses.
         | 
         | It does not protect the cornea. Only sunglasses can do that.
        
         | tlavoie wrote:
         | My wife had both eyes done over the past year. I would guess
         | that her new lenses did not have UV protection, because she has
         | a most interesting side effect.
         | 
         | Basically, certain glass will (to her) essentially fluoresce in
         | sunlight, so to her, it looks bright, bright purple. The glass
         | in question looks like a slight, smoky grey to me, as does the
         | glass vase at home with the same effect. I'd have to look for
         | the link, but essentially, the new lenses filter less UV than
         | the natural ones, and she's got a bit of sensitivity into that
         | range of the spectrum.
         | 
         | Similarly, a carved item made from yooperlite has the crystals
         | showing orange to her in sunlight, where the rest of us need to
         | hit it with a UV flashlight.
        
       | BrokenCogs wrote:
       | A shame that cataract surgery has become a money making scheme in
       | some countries (Canada), where surgeons often push unnecessary
       | expensive lenses to patients and focus exclusively on simple
       | cataract cases to fuel their high income lifestyles.
        
         | kragen wrote:
         | Countries like India where cataract surgery is for-profit tend
         | to have higher success rates and broader accessibility than
         | countries where it's not.
        
           | BrokenCogs wrote:
           | Source?
        
           | chongli wrote:
           | I'm not surprised. India produces very experienced surgeons
           | due to the very high volumes of surgeries they're able to
           | perform. I think part of this is the high population from
           | which to draw both doctors and patients coupled with the
           | intensely competitive academics and standardized testing.
        
         | Snoddas wrote:
         | They tried to up-sell me when I was in the chair during
         | surgery. (sweden)
        
       | cactusfrog wrote:
       | A lot of times those 5% people go blind :/
        
         | jelsisi wrote:
         | I was shocked when I saw a 5% failure rate, I would not take
         | those odds.
        
           | BrokenCogs wrote:
           | Well the alternative is to go blind due to cataracts... So
           | those are pretty good odds.
        
           | moduspol wrote:
           | It's probably per-eye, right?
        
             | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
             | 1 in 400 go blind, 19 in 400 become pirates, I assume
             | something along the lines of The Crimson Permanent
             | Assurance.
        
         | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
         | I was trying to track down what the 5% failure looks like. The
         | article source is here[1] for the 95% stat, which then
         | references here[2], but I honestly can't find it, [2] refers to
         | "Recent studies reveal that in most of the cases, the prognosis
         | is excellent after surgery, almost 70 to 80%", which refers to
         | here[3], which seems to refer to patient happiness(?), so I
         | haven't the foggiest where that 5% stat comes from.
         | 
         | Ultimately, I have no idea what the 5% failure means or looks
         | like or if it even is a real statistic. Maybe I'm just thick
         | and there's an obvious link or passage I missed.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559253/ [2]
         | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK539699/ [3]
         | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10243645/
        
       | madcaptenor wrote:
       | I had heard that C-section was the most common surgery but that
       | might just be in the US.
        
         | runxel wrote:
         | Before clicking on the link I assumed circumcision actually.
         | Basically half the population has got it done :D
         | 
         | (I know that the rate has lowered over the last years, but USA
         | still has what... 85+% ? Even higher in South Korea e.g.)
        
           | onychomys wrote:
           | I was thinking maybe wisdom teeth extraction.
        
             | Night_Thastus wrote:
             | Common, but a lot of people never get it. Either they
             | didn't grow wisdom teeth at all, or they aren't pressing
             | into the rest of the teeth in a way to cause a problem, or
             | they lack dental insurance.
             | 
             | It's one of those super low-priority surgeries for most
             | people. I'm very glad I got it done myself, though!
        
               | madcaptenor wrote:
               | Also that would come from a different data source, since
               | it's a surgery done on luxury bones as opposed to regular
               | bones.
        
           | OkayPhysicist wrote:
           | It's falling pretty quickly, down to about ~60% of male
           | infants as of 2022. General prevalence is higher (because
           | that's how decreasing rates work), somewhere around 80%, but
           | I'd suspect it's highly regional.
        
           | madcaptenor wrote:
           | That's another good guess - whatever you think about it it's
           | the surgery that's probably closest to being "routine".
        
           | bregma wrote:
           | If you wait a little it will go down on its own.
        
       | phito wrote:
       | I thought the first picture of the article was an USB-C
       | connector...
        
       | yapyap wrote:
       | > In 4,000 years, cataract surgery went from a crude procedure
       | involving thorn instruments to a 20-minute operation with a 95
       | percent clinical success rate.
       | 
       | I did go "yikes" a bit at 95%, a 1 in 20 failure rate is pretty
       | rough when its about your eyes
        
         | kragen wrote:
         | True, but if the alternative is continuing to be blind?
        
         | efitz wrote:
         | Just guessing, but likely "clinical success rate" here doesn't
         | mean "didn't make it worse" but actually means "improved the
         | underlying condition significantly".
        
           | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
           | The criteria for success seems to be "improved visual
           | acuity"[1]. I tried to find what the failures actually looked
           | like, but I hit a dead end[2].
           | 
           | [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559253/ [2]
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45414718#45449810
        
         | zindlerb wrote:
         | Many surgeries have a yikes success rate but when you need to
         | do it you need to do it unfortunately.
        
           | k__ wrote:
           | True, but 95% success rate doesn't mean 1 in 20 people lost
           | their eye or something dramatic.
        
         | tasty_freeze wrote:
         | Anecdote: my mother in law had cataracts in both eyes in her
         | mid 70s. She went to NYC to have the procedure done because
         | there was a doctor there she was told was very good.
         | 
         | She had one eye done and immediately after said: something is
         | wrong -- I can't see anything in that eye. They hushed her and
         | said, don't worry, in a couple days after giving your eye a bit
         | of time it will be good as new. Well, she remained blind in
         | that eye for the rest of her life. She never had the other eye
         | done for fear that she'd end up totally blind and lived another
         | 12 or so years with one cataract-clouded eye.
         | 
         | She didn't sue -- she was a "I don't want to make a fuss" kind
         | of personality. She did follow up with them a few times in that
         | first year, but they kept putting her off and downplaying that
         | she really couldn't see more than vague light and shadow in
         | that eye. Eventually she stopped contacting them.
        
         | jmull wrote:
         | I waited until I was mostly blind in my left eye and the right
         | was maybe 6-9 months behind, assuming it continued to progress
         | consistent with the left.
         | 
         | Driving at night had already been out-of-the-question for a
         | while, and soon I would be unable to work, at least without
         | learning an entirely new physical workflow.
         | 
         | At that point 1/20 is great. (It all worked out very well for
         | me.)
        
       | arethuza wrote:
       | I will always remember how happy my wife was as I drove her back
       | from cataract surgery on both eyes - the world suddenly looked an
       | awful lot better!
        
         | Snoddas wrote:
         | My mom got angry and asked why no one had told her how wrinkly
         | she'd gotten.
        
         | sowbug wrote:
         | Reminds me of my first eye exam as a nearsighted youngster. The
         | doctor told me to go look out the window with a pair of
         | temporary lenses. I exclaimed to my mom that those dark
         | splotches on hillsides were _trees_!
        
           | rockercoaster wrote:
           | I distinctly remember the main effect being that everything
           | suddenly looked way, way more "3D".
           | 
           | It actually briefly made me _worse_ at batting, in baseball.
           | Took some getting used to.
        
           | MandieD wrote:
           | When I first got glasses circa age 9, my first remark upon
           | leaving the shop was, "oh, wow, I can see the leaves from
           | here!" (standing under ca. 20-30 foot tall tree)
           | 
           | My mother later said she had never felt so guilty.
        
       | pantulis wrote:
       | A factoid: probably Johan Sebastian Bach died from eye surgery
       | complications.
       | 
       | https://interlude.hk/did-johann-sebastian-bach-die-from-eye-...
        
       | colinbartlett wrote:
       | Reading about historical cataract removal methods was...
       | difficult.
       | 
       | I feel truly lucky to have been born into a time of modern
       | medicine.
        
         | selimthegrim wrote:
         | Wait till you hear about how they used to wake people up before
         | smelling salts (hint: they used it on horses too)
        
         | pedro_caetano wrote:
         | > I feel truly lucky to have been born into a time of modern
         | medicine.
         | 
         | Well it really depends on how you look at it...
         | 
         | I would argue that the truly 'modern' aspect of cataract
         | surgery is the IOL manufacturing and implantation image-guided
         | systems.
         | 
         | I have a massive respect for Ophthalmic surgeons but worth
         | mentioning (most) current cataract surgeries still imply:
         | 
         | 1. A manual incision (read stabbing you with a handheld
         | scalpel)
         | 
         | 2. Capsulorhexis (manually open the lens capsule)
         | 
         | 3. Using a handheld ultrasonic 'jackhammer' to destroy the old
         | lens and quite literally suck it out, working in a foggy
         | environment with limited depth perception in a tiny chamber
         | right next to a thin film behind the lens.
         | 
         | 4. Finally then implanting the new IOL lens.
         | 
         | So with so much of 'modern' surgery still depending on Human
         | Perception and Human submilimiter dexterity, with surgeons who
         | are likely doing 16 plus surgeries a day. It is truly a
         | remarkable statistic that only 5% of Cataract surgeries suffer
         | complications.
         | 
         | And if you think the odds are against surgeons in Cataract
         | surgery wait until you read up on retinal surgery, then it
         | really drives the point home of how insanely skilled Ophthalmic
         | surgeons are.
        
       | m0llusk wrote:
       | Unfortunate that there is so much focus on treatment of advanced
       | symptoms. Cataracts may be caused in part by metabolic disease
       | which can be detected and treated before cataracts develop. Kind
       | of reminds me of how my great grandfather wouldn't pay for his
       | children or grandchildren to go to the dentist because they would
       | lose all their teeth by their mid twenties anyway.
        
       | nluken wrote:
       | People here are rightly pointing out that there's still room for
       | improvement with this (and almost any) kind of surgery, and the
       | article talks about the accessibility challenges of making
       | procedures like these more widely available, but after reading up
       | on the history of this procedure it's hard not to see modern
       | surgical techniques as a kind of man-made miracle. Great read.
        
         | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
         | It's nuts to read this technology has only been around since
         | 2008. It seems like it's been around forever.
         | 
         | I'm not _that_ old, so that 's part of it. And also, 17 years
         | is a long time in tech.
         | 
         | Regardless, it is a modern miracle that there's been this much
         | progress in that short of a time period.
         | 
         | The article stats a 95% success rate - which doesn't seem
         | great, but <0.5% of incidents have serious complications, most
         | of the other 5% are temporary minor complications.
        
         | pantulis wrote:
         | The miracle is when they put a _graduated_ lens and you get
         | cured of cataracts and myopia in a procedure where you are
         | awake and can perfectly ntoice how while the lens is being
         | inserted the blinding lights on top of you become more and more
         | defined.
         | 
         | It's nothing short of a man-made miracle but I have to say it's
         | also very umconfortable and stressful for the patient.
        
           | JadeNB wrote:
           | It sounds like it _must_ inevitably be uncomfortable and
           | stressful--why do they do it with the patient awake?
        
             | junikaefer wrote:
             | General anestesia is pretty secure, but 1:100.000 still end
             | deadly. Thats why general anesthesia is avoided whenever
             | possible, especially for small procedures like that. It's
             | also way more complicated, requiring a pre-medication talk,
             | an anesthetist being present and supervised rooms where
             | patients can wake up.
        
               | pantulis wrote:
               | I've wondered quite a lot about this. Look, the last
               | thing you want to hear while the procedure is being
               | performed is the surgeon saying: "Please, stop moving
               | your eye. Help me out here".
        
           | craftkiller wrote:
           | > it's also very umconfortable and stressful for the patient.
           | 
           | This is what concerns me. If someone took a blade to my eye,
           | I would be screaming, vomiting, and thrashing until I lose
           | consciousness even though my rational brain knows the
           | surgeons are helping. Are there options for the irrationally
           | mutilation-averse people such as myself (like general
           | anesthesia) or are my options just go blind or re-enact a Saw
           | movie?
        
             | el_benhameen wrote:
             | I worried about this too. I had surgery for a congenital
             | cataract at 27 or so. I was conscious-ish and remember
             | hearing the surgeon talking and doing something to my eye,
             | but they put you on some _wild_ drugs and I absolutely did
             | not care.
        
               | craftkiller wrote:
               | Ah thank you, that alleviates my concerns a lot. Now I
               | just hope they don't think I'm a drug-seeker when I tell
               | them to dial the drugs up to 11 :-D.
        
               | el_benhameen wrote:
               | Not to worry there, either! I think the drugs are pretty
               | standard, are not opiates, and honestly I think that most
               | humans understand that "if you're gonna poke me in the
               | eye, at least make sure I'm good and sloshed" is a pretty
               | reasonable ask.
        
             | xp84 wrote:
             | Me and you think the same. For me, even just knowing
             | they're going to be cutting on my eye and or using lasers
             | to burn parts of my eye, combined with the nonzero risk of
             | permanent vision worsening has made me permanently
             | uninterested in eye surgery (such as lasik). Even if I
             | could be put under for it.
        
             | bregma wrote:
             | I swear there would be nothing but heaps of smoking
             | machinery and mangled human limbs and entrails in the
             | operating theatre in my wake and they'd find me cowering in
             | some far corner of the building curled up in a foetal
             | position.
             | 
             | I can't even tolerate a glaucoma test and cut the
             | optometrist off mid-sentence when he starts to suggests it.
             | 
             | But that's me. I think my wife would do her own eye surgery
             | with just a mirror and some kitchen knives. Ugh, I wish I
             | hadn't thought of that. Excuse me while I go try to stop
             | the panic.
        
             | pndy wrote:
             | At least cataract surgery once done won't be likely
             | repeated. But there's also the age-related macular
             | degeneration that goes by... AMD acronym. The treatment
             | method for wet form involves intraocular injections, which
             | basically means a series of shots in the affected eye, up
             | until a "pocket" seen during eye tomography scan sizes down
             | and vision improves.
             | 
             | My mother is going to have 8th shot this year and 13th
             | total since doctor decides to test her. She describes the
             | injection as "potent hard pop". All patients gets the
             | anesthetics and some moisturising-softening agent so needle
             | could get in easier.
             | 
             | Seeing the queues many times I can tell this problem
             | concerns senior women, less frequently men and people of
             | both sexes below 60. Tho, I once saw a guy who was around
             | mid 40.
             | 
             | It's surely not fun to get a needle into your eye month by
             | month but mum and all the other people in the clinic are
             | _beyond_ that already.
        
           | BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 wrote:
           | The surgery is not fun. The worst part was the cannula for
           | the subtenon block - not painful, but my anxiety at something
           | being poked into my eye socket went through the roof. My
           | sister opted for sedation after she heard of my experience.
           | 
           | The second operation was easier as I told the surgeon about
           | my reaction to the subtenon block and he put some topical in
           | the right place making it much easier. However the residual
           | anxiety from the first operation remained. All that said,
           | I've had rougher times at the dentist.
           | 
           | I opted for optimal vision at arm's length with a monofocal
           | lens. We spend most of our days around the house. Bifocals
           | with plano below work fine for outdoors, driving and flying
           | (check with your aviation doctor before lens selection as
           | aviation authorities are strict in what lens options are
           | allowed). The depth of field has turned out better than I
           | expected, but I use 1.25 diopter drug store readers when I'm
           | using my tablet at home and put it at arm's length in the
           | coffee shop.
           | 
           | The results are absolutely wonderful and I feel gratitude
           | every time I step outside.
        
             | pantulis wrote:
             | For my second operation the surgeon basically suggested
             | using some drug ending in -pam (perhaps it was Valium) and
             | they wouldn't provide it over the counter so I had to get a
             | proper prescription, which somehow pissed the surgeon off.
             | At the end of the day, yes, a dentist is worse but the
             | phobia of someone tinkering with your eye remains.
             | 
             | I wanted something simple and didn't want to mess with
             | multifocal lens inside my eye, so opted for monofocal and
             | high myopia correction like around -12 diopters, so after a
             | couple of weeks my far vision felt like I was Superman and
             | my near vision remains poor with zero accommodation.
             | 
             | 5 years down the line, it seems the myopia is keeping its
             | course and I need some small correction for far, middle,
             | and reading distances so my drawers are a mess of glasses.
             | 
             | But I keep being grateful for this, I can walk the streets
             | without anything in my eyes and this is something I don't
             | have any memories I can recall. So it's a wonder.
             | 
             | I would gladly go again for that surgery even through the
             | discomfort!
        
           | mschaef wrote:
           | I had it done about eight years ago... there's nothing quite
           | like waking up after a fifteen minute procedure and seeing
           | better than you have without correction since you were five.
           | 
           | > It's nothing short of a man-made miracle but I have to say
           | it's also very umconfortable and stressful for the patient.
           | 
           | I think I must be strange, either in my reaction to the
           | stress or the way I chose to manage it during my surgery.
           | 
           | I explicitly wanted to be somewhat awake during the procedure
           | to see what was going on (how many chances do you get to see
           | your lens emulsified from the inside)... and I remember
           | having short conversations with the surgeon during the
           | procedure. (She'd been concerned about zonular laxity, and we
           | discussed during the procedure that she didn't see evidence.)
           | 
           | This is not something I'd want to reproduce if I didn't have
           | to, nor would I suggest it as a general approach, but given
           | that it was necessary for me, it was amazing to see it first
           | hand.
           | 
           | My second procedure (second eye) was a little more stressful
           | than the first, but for me all the material stress (which was
           | significant) was in the run up and anticipation.
        
         | pndy wrote:
         | It's here already - at least for the developed countries. It's
         | both thanks to this multitool used to handle the surgery -
         | destroying, removing natural lens and replacing it with an
         | implant, and technology that allowed creating customized
         | intraocular lenses pretty fast.
         | 
         | My mother had her eyes done 2 years ago with one month break
         | between. I did set timer on second surgery and it was just 20
         | minutes once she was inside. The only thing we had to care
         | about were drops administered 4 times a day before and after
         | the procedure - for once multiple alarms on my phone were
         | useful. And of course control visit with dressing removal that
         | happens for every patient on second day.
         | 
         | In my city a duet of two doctors runs an ophthalmology clinic
         | and seems they have some good contracts with health services
         | because they're always busy and have shorter waiting lists than
         | clinic at our local hospital. Both women handle a queue of
         | about 20 people and each weekday is dedicated to a different
         | issues, with serious surgeries reserved for weekends.
         | 
         | I ask one of doctors if failed cataract surgeries happen
         | because I was concerned before the first time my mum had it.
         | She said that these are extremely rare but if a patient needs
         | another it happens again pretty fast. The issue might be with
         | lens that moved inside due to e.g. patient activity shortly
         | after the procedure.
         | 
         | I do remember some short documentary about probably an Indian
         | surgeon who treated eyes of North Korean elderly people. He
         | also visited other places around the world as sort of personal
         | goal to give new eye care technology in places where is needed
         | but socio-economic conditions do not allow it. I'll try to find
         | that unless someone happen to know that man's name.
        
           | eyeundersand wrote:
           | His name is Sanduk Ruit and he's Nepali. A huge inspiration!
        
             | pndy wrote:
             | Thank you; I managed to find that documentary but it seems
             | it was a part of large thing:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXYokXfbrWs
             | 
             | Here's another by DW:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xz729FOOk94
        
       | Alex3917 wrote:
       | More common than needing stitches? That's hard to believe.
        
         | codingdave wrote:
         | Yeah, their claim that it is the most common procedure is
         | incorrect. There are more colonoscopies performed every year,
         | too. I followed the citations and they are citing a 2007 paper
         | that was meta-analysis regarding cost effectiveness of cataract
         | surgery, so the claim gets more dubious the deeper you dig.
         | 
         | The article is still interesting, but they probably should have
         | left that claim out.
        
           | Tzt wrote:
           | Well, it's also an indicator for how well its other claims
           | would hold up if you dug deeper on them too.
        
             | navigate8310 wrote:
             | The article is pumped from a low income country, where they
             | have questionable research procedures. What can you expect?
        
       | everdrive wrote:
       | 95% success rate is actually a bit lower than I realized, and is
       | somewhat scary.
        
         | nwah1 wrote:
         | But that doesn't mean 5% of the people walk out of the
         | procedure completely blinded.
         | 
         | In many cases, failed surgery just means having to go again.
        
         | Jonovono wrote:
         | And the ones that have a bad time, have a really bad time, to
         | the point of suicide in cases. Not sure if I would risk it if I
         | didn't have 20/15 vision tbh
        
           | pantulis wrote:
           | You will risk it, eventually. Cataracts appear and get worse
           | to the point of you becoming blind.
        
             | Jonovono wrote:
             | I suppose in that case, possibly. I more mean for people
             | that are doing it for cosmetic reasons (not to wear
             | contacts)
        
               | pantulis wrote:
               | Oh, hard agree on that!
        
               | eloisant wrote:
               | You're thinking about Lasik, this is different from
               | cataract surgery.
        
         | searine wrote:
         | That success rate tracks with most common types of surgery,
         | there are always edge cases.
         | 
         | The exception is back surgery, and the odds get worse and worse
         | if revisions are necessary.
        
       | bell-cot wrote:
       | Who's defining "surgery" here? Obviously not a dentist.
        
       | adolph wrote:
       | > 95 percent clinical success rate
       | 
       | I'm not certain if a 5% fail rate is good or not. Fwiw, Cleveland
       | Clinic [0] claims "Surgery improves vision for 97% of people" and
       | an infection rate of less than .1%.                 Retinal
       | detachment, affecting 2 in 1,000 people.       Infection,
       | affecting fewer than 1 in 1,000 people.
       | 
       | 0.
       | https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/21472-catar...
        
       | phyphy wrote:
       | The first recorded instance of cataract surgery was in 600BCE
       | India.
        
         | mac3n wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cataract_surgery
         | 
         | > Cataract surgery was first mentioned in the Babylonian code
         | of Hammurabi 1750 BCE.[13] The earliest known depiction of
         | cataract surgery is on a statue from the Fifth Dynasty of Egypt
         | (2467-2457 BCE).[
        
       | xhkkffbf wrote:
       | The 95% rate sounds good. But I routinely run into some of that
       | 5%. It's not zero or even 1%.
        
       | Qem wrote:
       | Is there some way to prevent cataracts, or is that just another
       | unavoidable fact of ageing, like graying hair.
        
         | jacobgkau wrote:
         | While protein buildup is somewhat natural with aging, my
         | understanding is that e.g. looking into the sun too much (which
         | exposes your eyes to UV light, among other things) exacerbates
         | it.
        
         | pantulis wrote:
         | I had cataracts when I was 48 and my ophtalmologist told me
         | that everybody gets cataracts but there are factors that make
         | it appear sooner, like smoking (and yes, I am a smoker). But
         | it's more or less unavoidable.
        
         | jabroni_salad wrote:
         | The only thing that's really guaranteed is presbyopia in middle
         | age. The lens will become harder and you will not be able to
         | focus on near objects as well.
        
         | el_benhameen wrote:
         | Wear sunglasses (or your regular uv-protective polycarbonate
         | glasses), even when it's not real sunny out.
        
         | crisdux wrote:
         | Cataracts aren't about age. They happen when the lens loses
         | energy and the water inside it loses structure. Getting real
         | sunlight, eating for metabolism, and avoiding stress and fake
         | blue rich light keeps your eyes clear and alive.
         | 
         | I've improved my own eyesight and my wife's by following these
         | principles. Mainstream medicine would probably give other
         | explanations or just dismiss it altogether.
        
           | 542458 wrote:
           | There's no evidence that "fake blue rich light" at normal
           | exposure levels has any effect, and not for lack of
           | investigation. Ironically, "real sunlight" which you
           | highlight as a benefit is actually a risk factor, given that
           | UV-B and UV-A damage the lens - which is why sunglasses are
           | recommended.
           | 
           | I'd highlight that much of the publicly-perceived "dangers"
           | of blue light are, at best, exaggerations of weak evidence by
           | lens manufacturers who want to upsell blue light blocking
           | spectacles or IOLs. It's not like there's some big medical
           | conspiracy to keep the dangers of normal levels of blue light
           | a secret - the medical manufacturers would love for it to be
           | true so they could sell you more products.
        
           | pcrh wrote:
           | >the water inside it loses structure.
           | 
           | It isn't the water that loses structure (how could it?), but
           | the proteins that constitute the lens material.
        
       | tristor wrote:
       | This was a really interesting read, and really makes me
       | appreciate how much medical technology has improved. I have been
       | considering getting ICL surgery or similar for years, but the
       | improvements are still happening and I find that I wait 5 years
       | or so and something new is developed. At some point I will get
       | eye surgery, but until then, I'm very happy to see that we
       | continually improve.
        
       | jtwaleson wrote:
       | One of my best friends is a corneal surgeon at a university
       | hospital, and does cataract surgery when there are other special
       | complications. This is in Western Europe.
       | 
       | He told me about a work trip to India he did and how amazed he
       | was by the routine, efficiency and lack of waste there was over
       | there in regular cataract surgery. Literally one doctor would
       | handle 5x to 10x as many surgeries per day as their western
       | counterparts. Where each surgery here requires full sterilization
       | from scratch, there they kept their wrapping etc between
       | surgeries, and had two beds side by side. The surgeon would do
       | one surgery while the other patient would be changed. Then he
       | turned around and did the next cataract surgery.
       | 
       | We have a lot of waste in our medical practices.
        
         | majormajor wrote:
         | One person's waste is another person's more comfortable
         | routine; one person's efficiency is another person's grueling
         | day. (Even setting aside possible complications from not re-
         | sterilizing, in this specific example.)
         | 
         | Our goal should be to have a comfortable amount of capacity in
         | the system so that we don't _need_ to sweat the details, not to
         | hyper-optimize everyone into human machines.
        
           | recursive wrote:
           | This is what makes Electron apps.
        
           | givemeethekeys wrote:
           | It sounds like you're implying that doctors in the West have
           | a more relaxed work schedule and really prefer their pace
           | over an Indian doctor.
           | 
           | What you may not be taking into account are:
           | 
           | - The massive amount of soul crushing paper work in the West.
           | 
           | - Having to deal with insurance companies.
           | 
           | - Having to deal with the demands of patients who think they
           | know better.
           | 
           | What compensates for the shit job:
           | 
           | - How much more one can buy with USD / Euro. But, this is
           | changing rapidly.
        
             | soperj wrote:
             | > - The massive amount of soul crushing paper work in the
             | West.
             | 
             | This sounds like a problem in the US only.
        
               | jtwaleson wrote:
               | Not sure how much worse it is in the US, but here in NL
               | it's a huge problem for GPs too.
        
             | BrandoElFollito wrote:
             | No doctors ever deal with insurance companies in France
        
         | matsz wrote:
         | As a patient, I'm not sure if I'd be comfortable with the
         | doctor operating on me doing a speedrun.
         | 
         | Full sterilization before each surgery is a good thing. Better
         | safe than sorry. Same for only having one patient in the
         | operating room - reduced risk of contamination and human error.
        
           | lithocarpus wrote:
           | That's fair, except that sometimes there aren't enough
           | resources (qualified surgeons, facilities, etc) for everyone
           | to get that kind of care. I'd rather cheap care that is 95%
           | good enough than none at all. (For things I really need - I
           | think a majority of what the healthcare industry does is
           | counterproductive but there is also plenty of stuff that's
           | good like cataract surgery for example.)
        
             | TheJoeMan wrote:
             | You'd accept a 1 in 20 chance of acquiring a staph
             | infection?
        
               | zamadatix wrote:
               | Depending how bad my situation was and what my
               | alternative options are.
        
               | soperj wrote:
               | don't you have that just going to the hospital now a
               | days?
        
           | LeifCarrotson wrote:
           | It's not a binary choice between a civil war surgeon's saw
           | and an immaculate cleanroom, safety exists on a spectrum.
           | Better safe enough than so incomprehensibly safe that the
           | procedure is unaffordable and the doctor has 1/10th the
           | experience and 100x as much paperwork!
           | 
           | Imagine, for a minute, that there's a physical lever at the
           | FDA that controls the amount of cost, bureaucracy, and
           | triple-checks that occur in hospitals. Think one of those
           | steam engine throttles, with the big pawl release lever, it's
           | set in front of an angle gauge with colors from red to green.
           | One side is marked "Anarchy" and the other is marked "Better
           | safe than sorry". Right now, that lever (or the metaphorical
           | regulatory lever, the physical lever doesn't actually exist
           | AFAIK) is as far over to the "safe" side as I can imagine it
           | possibly being. The US lags behind on many modern medications
           | and procedures, health care is unaffordable for somewhere
           | between many and most, it's so miserably difficult to enter
           | the field that we're not educating and training enough
           | people, and the people that we do have trained are spending
           | too much of their time doing paperwork and fighting the
           | insurance system to take care of people. If you or a loved
           | one have ever gotten a refusal of treatment or needed to wait
           | for your disease to get worse before you can get care, you
           | know how real this lever is.
           | 
           | If you ever get access to that lever, please, bring it at
           | least one click back off the limiter. Maybe two. The
           | potential harms that you imagine could caused by
           | contamination and human error, at the moment, are less than
           | the actual harms that are happening right now due to lack of
           | affordable access.
           | 
           | People are going blind, in pain, or dying right now because
           | it's too far towards the "better safe than sorry" side. If
           | you were on a fixed income and found yourself unable to
           | afford a $8000 cataract surgery as the world slowly grew dim,
           | you'd wish you could visit an efficient practice and get it
           | done for $150, even if that meant there was another patient
           | on the other side of the OR.
        
             | jtwaleson wrote:
             | Exactly this. 10x the experience is very valuable.
        
           | TrainedMonkey wrote:
           | This one is a tough sell, in that regime the doctors will
           | have a significantly higher amount of practice which might
           | translate into mastery. On the other hand I would expect
           | post-procedure tracking and reporting be significantly better
           | in the west.
        
         | elSidCampeador wrote:
         | I imagine the pace in India was also borne out of necessity -
         | there are just so many more cases to go through there, that the
         | surgeons had no choice but to adapt.
        
         | 1-more wrote:
         | This sounds a bit like the Sunrise Hospital Emergency Room
         | treating patients from the Mandalay Bay shooting in 2017
         | 
         | > I said, "Bring all your patients together." They brought them
         | all towards me, and I was at the head of multiple beds,
         | spiraling out like flower petals around its center. We pushed
         | drugs on all of them, and they all got intubated, transfused,
         | chest tubed, and then shuffled to Station 1.
         | 
         | > the respiratory therapist, said, "Menes, we don't have any
         | more ventilators." I said, "It's fine," and requested some Y
         | tubing. Dr. Greg Neyman, a resident a year ahead of me in
         | residency, had done a study on the use of ventilators in a mass
         | casualty situation. What he came up with was that if you have
         | two people who are roughly the same size and tidal volume, you
         | can just double the tidal volume and stick them on Y tubing on
         | one ventilator.
         | 
         | Groovy in an emergency scenario, but I, a humble non-doctor,
         | like the idea of fewer compromises of sterility as the de
         | rigueur way of doing things for non emergency surgeries.
         | 
         | https://epmonthly.com/article/not-heroes-wear-capes-one-las-...
        
           | koolba wrote:
           | >> What he came up with was that if you have two people who
           | are roughly the same size and tidal volume, you can just
           | double the tidal volume and stick them on Y tubing on one
           | ventilator.
           | 
           | That is seriously cool!
        
         | zer00eyz wrote:
         | > Where each surgery here requires full sterilization from
         | scratch, there they kept their wrapping etc between surgeries,
         | and had two beds side by side.
         | 
         | This is like the old soviet block model:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr_wcrX0d_A
        
         | tyre wrote:
         | Sounds like they do something similar!
         | 
         | From TFA:
         | 
         | > Aravind uses a two-pronged approach to addressing the lack of
         | ophthalmologists: First, it enhances the efficiency of the
         | existing staff. The hospital has an innovative "assembly line"
         | operating theatre that allows a single surgeon to alternate
         | between two fully prepared tables, each supported by dedicated
         | instrument sets and nursing teams. This approach enables six to
         | eight cataract operations per hour compared to an industry norm
         | of one, while delivering clinical outcomes that even surpass
         | those achieved in the UK's National Health Service.
         | 
         | 6-8x throughput is very impressive.
        
       | oulipo2 wrote:
       | The SIVA foundation and the Hellen Keller institute are going
       | NGOs to fund to help with those surgeries in third-world
       | countries
        
       | stoneman24 wrote:
       | Would like to see the stats behind the 5% complication rate. My
       | understanding was under the NHS in the UK, the major complication
       | rate was under 1%
       | 
       | My private surgeon was quoting well under that. 6 weeks post op
       | on both eyes and it's slightly weird not needing glasses (unless
       | I have small print in a book) as he fixed the cataracts and the
       | astigmatism due to the more expensive than standard lens
       | implants.
       | 
       | Just a pity there wasn't a option to have HUD display built into
       | the new lenses
        
         | vhcr wrote:
         | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559253/
        
         | pcrh wrote:
         | According to the reference provided [0], that's for all
         | cataract surgery, and cataracts can arise for multiple reasons,
         | half are genetic and so might have attendant complications. The
         | success rate for the most common surgery performed in the West,
         | age-related cataracts, is likely much higher.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559253/
        
       | nick__m wrote:
       | Something missing from the article is the discovery of local
       | anesthetic (cocaine) by Dr. Carl Koller an opthamologist in 1884.
       | It must have improved the success rate tremendously.
        
       | trashface wrote:
       | Only 95% success? That is actually pretty bad, as anyone who has
       | rolled a d20 enough times knows.
        
       | mindcrime wrote:
       | I can so relate to this. I just had cataract surgery (both eyes)
       | back in August. Amazing. The procedure took about 20 minutes, was
       | totally pain free (thanks to anesthesia), and my vision is
       | markedly improved. And even more important than the point that I
       | can _see_ better now, is that I just plain _feel_ better and to a
       | degree that 's hard to put into words.
       | 
       | It turns out, apparently, that when you are dealing with constant
       | severe levels of eye strain and eye fatigue as a result of
       | cataracts, that feeling somehow permeates throughout your whole
       | body and leaves you feeling like dogshit. At least that's the way
       | it was for me. Within, say, 10 hours of my surgery, I felt better
       | than I'd felt in probably a year.
       | 
       | Now, are things perfect? No... I do have some (expected) side
       | effects based on the lens replacement I chose (panoptix).
       | Specifically I see rings around bright lights, especially at
       | night. And reading text on a computer screen is a bit annoying
       | since I sometimes see a bit of a halo or glow effect around
       | fonts, especially with my preferred "green on black" terminal
       | configuration. But I can live with that, and the only other side
       | effects so far are the occasional day when one or both eyes seem
       | a bit more light sensitive than normal. I understand that will
       | fade over time. On balance though, for how much better I feel
       | now, and for being able to read without glasses, it's totally
       | worth it.
        
       | 3shv wrote:
       | I have mild cataracts and myopia. Should I get IOL lens or do
       | ReLEx SMILE?
        
       | SomeHacker44 wrote:
       | I was under the impression that modern replacement lenses could
       | flex under muscular control like the lenses of pre-presbyopic
       | people. That was not mentioned in the article though. I am not
       | hoping for cataracts but I thought that would be a nice boon to
       | having the surgery, not needing progressives.
        
       | southernplaces7 wrote:
       | For those of you who don't know of it, I really recommend the
       | novel "The Physician" by Noah Gordon. It tracks the story of a
       | young urban worker's son whose father dies early in early 13th
       | century London and who gets taken as an orphan by a barber (the
       | 13th century's country doctors basically) who teaches him what he
       | knows of basic medicine.
       | 
       | There's a scene later in the book, as he's apprenticing in his
       | English country world, where he meets a jewish doctor who
       | performs a cataract surgery. To this rustic apprentice of a mere
       | barber, this seems like magic. He asks the jewish physician where
       | he learned such a medical marvel and the man explains that he had
       | studied in Al Andaluz, under doctors who had trained in Isfahan
       | in the Caliphate under Ibn Sinna. Without going into too much
       | further detail, the book is absolutely wonderful, especially as
       | the English apprentice meets the legendary Sinna after managing
       | to travel all the way to Isfahan to also study there.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-02 23:00 UTC)