Harold Ridley and the invention of the intraocular lens: a reappraisal

Harold Ridley permanently implanted the first intraocular lens (IOL) in 1950. The widely accepted narrative is that Ridley and his invention received a hostile reception from Stewart Duke-Elder and other ophthalmic thought leaders. Ridley suffered greatly but was eventually vindicated as later IOL designs were widely accepted. This narrative casts Ridley as a prophetic innovator who suffered and eventually triumphed against the forces of animosity, jealousy and close-mindedness arrayed against him. We argue that this narrative is biased because it was told by Ridley himself and amplified by his biographer and close friend, David Apple. There were good reasons to be skeptical of Ridley's invention. Ridley had not done pre-clinical studies, so his first patients suffered avoidable complications. He worked in secret at a time when openness was the norm. Ridley's IOL had a high percentage of poor outcomes. The cautious approach that Duke-Elder and others had towards IOLs is understandable. The accurate history is a story of a clash of worldviews between an inventor who was focused on innovating quickly to solve a major clinical problem and established leaders who were concerned about the harm to patients from a flawed invention. The skepticism of established thought leaders remains a valuable check on aggressive innovation today.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
Published
2024-12-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001591
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.62
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Harold Ridley and the invention of the intraocular lens: a reappraisal

Sloan Mahone, Robert K. Maloney
3 citations
Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
1.62
article

Harold Ridley and the invention of the intraocular lens: a reappraisal

Sloan Mahone, Robert K. Maloney
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Harold Ridley permanently implanted the first intraocular lens (IOL) in 1950. The widely accepted narrative is that Ridley and his invention received a hostile reception from Stewart Duke-Elder and other ophthalmic thought leaders. Ridley suffered greatly but was eventually vindicated as later IOL designs were widely accepted. This narrative casts Ridley as a prophetic innovator who suffered and eventually triumphed against the forces of animosity, jealousy and close-mindedness arrayed against him. We argue that this narrative is biased because it was told by Ridley himself and amplified by his biographer and close friend, David Apple. There were good reasons to be skeptical of Ridley's invention. Ridley had not done pre-clinical studies, so his first patients suffered avoidable complications. He worked in secret at a time when openness was the norm. Ridley's IOL had a high percentage of poor outcomes. The cautious approach that Duke-Elder and others had towards IOLs is understandable. The accurate history is a story of a clash of worldviews between an inventor who was focused on innovating quickly to solve a major clinical problem and established leaders who were concerned about the harm to patients from a flawed invention. The skepticism of established thought leaders remains a valuable check on aggressive innovation today.

Journal of Cataract & Refractive SurgeryVol. 51(7)
University of Oxford (GB), Maloney Vision Institute (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
1.62
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.