CIME 2025: What the first intraocular lens can teach modern optometrists

Commentary
Video

At the Controversies in Modern Eye Care (CIME) meeting in Los Angeles, California, Robert Maloney, MD, MA, shone a spotlight on a historic event that continues to shape the field: the first implantation of an IOL by Sir Harold Ridley in 1950. While hailed today as a foundational innovation in cataract surgery, Ridley’s groundbreaking work was initially met with hostility, skepticism, and ethical concern. His experience serves as a compelling reminder to optometrists that innovation often walks a tightrope between risk and reward.

The controversy behind the invention

Key takeaways for optometrists:

  • Innovation vs. Safety: Ridley’s IOL teaches us that revolutionary ideas often face justified resistance—and that careful evaluation is essential.
  • History as a Guide: Understanding the past can illuminate current challenges in optometric care and innovation.
  • Practical Learning: CIME provides an information-dense, clinically relevant environment that encourages immediate application to practice.

Ridley’s first IOL implantation, though revolutionary, came at a time when medical experimentation lacked today’s rigorous oversight. The early IOLs caused severe inflammation and had not been adequately tested in animals. As noted during the presentation, these practices arguably violated principles of the then-emerging Nuremberg Code, which emphasized informed consent and ethical clinical research.

Yet the controversy wasn’t simply about safety; it highlighted a critical tension that persists today: the push for innovation vs the duty to protect patients from harm. As Maloney emphasized, “The process of invention is really a conversation between the inventor, who’s doing something radical, and the establishment, which says, ‘We need to protect patients.’”

A cyclical history of innovation

Drawing a parallel to today’s advancements, Maloney suggested that history doesn’t repeat itself—but it does spiral. As optometrists encounter emerging treatments, technologies, and diagnostic tools, Ridley’s story offers a historical lens through which to assess new developments. It reminds clinicians to ask essential questions: Are we balancing innovation with safety? Are we learning from past missteps?

Why CIME takes a different approach

Unlike traditional, lecture-heavy meetings, the CIME format emphasizes discussion, debate, and practical takeaways. Rather than providing long lists of diagnoses, the sessions challenge practitioners to think critically about the “gray zones” of modern practice. Every 10 to 15 minutes, attendees will likely hear a pearl that can be directly applied to patient care.

“This meeting is not about rehearsing what we already know,” said Maloney. “It’s about exploring what we don’t know—and doing it with colleagues in a fast-paced, collegial setting.”

Newsletter

Want more insights like this? Subscribe to Optometry Times and get clinical pearls and practice tips delivered straight to your inbox.

Recent Videos
Dr Selina McGee shares thoughts on pharmacological presbyopia correction at Controversies in Modern Eye Care 2025
Paul Hammond, OD, FAAO, presents a poster at ARVO 2025 on the creation of a conversion factor between 2 OCT devices to monitor glaucoma progression
CIME 25: Dilsher Dhoot, MD, FASRS, is excited about emerging retinal therapies.
Dr Jacob Lang at the 2025 Controversies in Modern Eye Care meeting
Steven Ferrucci, OD, FAAO, at Controversies in Modern Eyecare 2025
At CIME 2025, Selina McGee, OD, FAAO, says some patients underestimate oculoplastic care. She stands in front of a sign that says Controversies in Modern Eye Care 2025.
Patricia Buehler, MD, MPH, at ASCRS 2025
Brett Bielory, MD, at ASCRS 2025
At ASCRS 2025, Alex Hacopian, MD, shares information from his presentation on next-gen presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses.
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.