The US is unfortunately a few years at least behind the EU and elsewhere, and in fact some companies don't seem to even bother applying for approval in the US for new lenses. I haven't heard anything for instance about the major EU trifocals, the AT Lisa Tri and the Finevision, even attempting to get US approval. Fortunately the Symfony is made by an American company AMO and the Tecnis family of IOLs is widely used in the US and so I've read they recently submitted data to the FDA for approval. The Symfony is consired to be in a new class of IOLs, "extended depth of focus" so I'd read they have been coming up with guidelines for how to evaluate such lenses for approval. So unfortunately how long approval will take is hard to guess, it takes a long time for even product categories they already have setup, so I don't know if it'll be 6 or 12 or 18 months, I've seen different guesses. I know Alcon has had a trifocal recently approved in the EU, the Panoptix, and since they are also a major US supplier of IOLs perhaps they will be seeking approval for that as well, though I've no idea the timeline. I've also seen absolutely no data or studies on the Panoptix, which is odd, though its likely similar to the existing trifocals.
After I got the Symfony, the US approved some low add bifocals earlier this eyar which seem like a fairly decent option for those who need surgery soon in the US. They will still split the light which reduces contrast sensitivity. I don't know if you'd tried multifocal contact lenses since those have the same issue. I never found it to be a problem with multifocal contacts when I wore them, but with the Symfony I have noticeably better low light vision than I had with the multifocal contacts (a restaurant I have a weekly meeting in has lower light and I'm so familiar with it that I immediately noticed the difference looking at the menu, and the room and people). If the low add bifocals were available in the US at the time I might have considered going for those rather than traveling, but the Symfony still seems a better bet.
Someone I know about the same age here had the Crystalens implants, and oddly even though those are a single focus lens, he notices a drop off in near vision with lower light. I met him after a lecture in a well lit auditorum and he had a near reading chart, and even holding a folder over the chart to cast a shadow was enough for his near vision to be reduced, but it didn't make a difference for mine. I don't know for sure how much is optics of the IOL vs. personal variation in our eyes.
The optics of a multifocal contact lens aren't exactly the same as multifocal IOLs (likely not as good as an IOL meant to last decades and not move as much), but they are still a good test case I think to get some idea. The fact that I preferred multifocal contacts to monovision contacts was one reason I was interested from the start in a premium IOL. For instance even though I'd not noticed a reduction in stereopsis, 3D vision, when wearing contacts in monovision a few years, when I switched to multifocals I was suddenly aware of what I'd been missing, near objects did seem more 3D.
The Symfony has recently been approved in Canada, which isn't as far to go (although it may be comparable to US prices). I don't know if the trifocals are available in Canada, but I know the AT Lisa tri is available in Mexico in clinics that seem to be likely US quality treatment that are located just over the border from San Diego (at least one mentions they will transport people from hotels on the US side of the border to the clinic) to take advantage of the differing approval policies. I hadn't evaluated clinics in either country since they didn't have the Symfony a year ago.
I had decided to go to Europe to get a better lens, and then discovered the UK was somewhat expensive and that there is a medical toursim industry elsewhere in Europe to take advantage of that, with the Czech Republic a common destination for high quality treatment at lower prices. I figured that as long as I was traveling, if I could get high quality treatment I may as well go for a lower priced country. I was only 52 when I had the surgery so I figured it was worth some hassle to get a better lens since I may be living with it a few decades, and since I'd been highly myopic all my life I liked the idea of not needing correction anymore.
Most doctors here didn't have any trouble with the idea of doing followup visits (though ask around, a minority seem to dislike following up other people's patients), there is nothing medically different about the Symfony compared to other IOLs, the optics are just different. It is the same overall physical shape and material as the widely used Tecnis lenses in the US. Also, after I had my surgery there have been Symfony trials in the US so some US surgeons do already have experience with it. I think the trials are over since they have submitted data to the FDA (if there are any trials ongoing for the Symfony in the US, it may not be a good option since at least the initial one I heard of was randomized, a 50-50 chance you'd get a monofocal).
Since I spent a great deal of time on the computer (as my username was meant to indicate re: my visual needs), intermediate distance is important and when I had my surgery done a year ago the only bifocals available in the US were high adds that weren't as good for intermediate vision, and in a small fraction of patients the Crystalens doesn't provide anything more than a monofocal (and has some risk of complications other lenses don't have, like z-syndrome, though the newest version seems to be better). I'd had good luck with multifocal contacts so I wasn't worried about going for a multifocal, so initially I'd expected to go outside the US for a trifocal lens to get better intermediate. Then the Symfony came out, which has better intermediate vision than the trifocals, but not as good really near. I figured that was an ok tradeoff to make since it also has contrast sensitivity comparable to a good monofocal and lower risk of problematic halos, comparable to a monofocal (some folks see halos even with a monofocal).
I turned out to be in the minority of patients who do see halos with the Symfony, but they are translucent, I see through/past them, so I don't find them to be a problem. Overall as far as I can tell my night vision is better than it was before I had a problem cataract, less glare from headlghts for instance, which makes up for halos from headlights. I'm not sure if being atypically young to get lens replacement made seeing halos more likely with any lens.
Intermediate vision was important to me since aside from computer distance, it includes most social distance and household tasks, TV, etc. I also realized after the fact that since I hike&run on trails around here that its useful to have crisp intermediate vision since that is what you are using to pick out your footing amidst rocks and avoid icy patches during the winter (even just for normal walking around outside during the winter its good to be able to spot ice of course, unless you live in a warmer area). I think the trifocals would still have been good enough for that, even if their intermediate isn't quite as good, I can't picture how much difference it would have made.