ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Explantation of KAMRA Corneal Inlay: 10-Year Occurrence and Visual Outcome Analysis.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Presbyopia: Current Perspectives and Prospects for Patients.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Review
- Evaluating the Rate and Causes of Non-candidacy After Laser-Assisted in Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) Screening.Cureus · 2025Article
- Matrix optics of artificial intraocular pinhole apertures in astigmatic eyes: modelling depth of field.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Complications of Small Aperture Intracorneal Inlays: A Literature Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate 10 years of KAMRA corneal inlay explantation and associated visual outcomes. Patients and Methods: Single-site retrospective chart review of 22 cases of AcuFocus KAMRA Inlay (ACI7000PDT) explantation (range 1 week-1 year). Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and manifest refraction at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year post-explantation were reviewed. Results: The explantation rate was 8.2% across 10 years. All patients underwent KAMRA explantation due to dissatisfaction with their vision including blurry near vision, impaired night vision, decreased vision in dim lighting, streaks or halos, haze, and double vision. Mean UDVA pre-implant was -0.01±0.13 logMAR (logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution), 0.30±0.22 logMAR pre-explant, and 0.16±0.15 logMAR post-explant (n=20). Mean UNVA pre-implant was 0.37±0.09 logMAR, 0.38±0.13 logMAR pre-explant, and 0.42±0.21 logMAR post-explant (n=20). Mean CDVA pre-implant was -0.01±0.04 logMAR and 0.05±0.11 logMAR post-explant (n=17). Mean CDVA pre-explant was 0.04±0.07 logMAR and 0.04±0.11 logMAR post-explant (n=19). Significant differences were observed between pre-implant and post-explant UDVA (p=0.009), and between pre-explant and post-explant UDVA (p=0.02). All patients (100%) had 20/20 or better CDVA pre-implant but decreased to 73.7% post-explant. Sixty percent (12/20) of the patients lost UDVA Snellen acuity lines post-explant. MRSE was -0.31±0.29 D pre-implant and +0.26±0.77 D post-explant (p=0.007) with note of a hyperopic shift. The hyperopic shift in 31.6% (6/19) of patients did not resolve after explantation. Post-explant residual corneal haze occurred in 72.7% (16/22) of patients. Conclusion: Although the KAMRA corneal inlay is a removable device, patients may experience residual corneal haze, hyperopic shift, and deficits in UDVA after explantation compared to pre-implantation UDVA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.