Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40666275›Full record

ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025

Intracorneal Ring Segments in Keratoconus: A Narrative Literature Review.

Usman K Hayat, Haaris A Shiwani, Danyal Memon, Andrew Walkden

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Trends in the Management of Keratoconus in Australia.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Usman K Hayat *Department of Ophthalmology, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Haaris A Shiwani *Department of Ophthalmology, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Danyal MemonDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Andrew WalkdenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9196-6219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Keratoconus is a bilateral, non-inflammatory corneal ectasia characterized by progressive thinning and conical protrusion, leading to irregular astigmatism, usually in association with high myopia. Visual rehabilitation options include corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL), rigid gas permeable contact lenses, intracorneal ring segments (ICRS), phakic intraocular lenses, and corneal transplantation. ICRS are synthetic, biocompatible implants or allogenic corneal tissue, designed to reduce corneal curvature and optimize the refractive profiles. Initially used in 1978 to treat myopia, their role in keratoconus was established in 2000. This review explores ICRS types, surgical techniques, and emerging developments. Methods: A literature review was conducted using PubMed. A total of 117 peer-reviewed manuscripts, including review articles, randomized controlled trials, case series, and reports, were analysed. Reference lists of publications were also reviewed. Results: ICRS types include MyoRings, KeraRings, Ferrara Rings, and Intacs, each with unique design characteristics and implantation methods. Corneal allogenic intrastromal ring segments represent the latest innovation in ICRS. Femtosecond laser-assisted tunnel creation offers improved control over stromal depth and uniformity, reducing complications compared to mechanical dissection. Studies indicate slight corneal stiffening post-ICRS implantation, with no significant changes in intraocular pressure. Topographic changes post-ICRS show significant corneal flattening and reduction in astigmatism. Complications include epithelial defects, segment migration, and keratitis, but long-term follow-up reveals low rates of serious adverse events. Conclusion: ICRS provide an effective option for enhancing vision in select keratoconus patients, ultimately lowering the chances of requiring a corneal transplant. They are of particular use in those intolerant to contact lenses and without central corneal scarring. Future research should focus on long-term outcomes. Combining ICRS with other procedures like CXL may enhance outcomes, though careful patient selection is crucial.

Indexed as

Intracorneal ring segmentskeratoconus

Identifiers

PMID40666275
PMCPMC12262075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.