No 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.

To determine rates of enhancement and visual prognosis following photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) enhancement of small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Patients and Methods: This retrospective, single-site study reviewed all cases of primary SMILE at Hoopes Vision in Draper, Utah between March 14, 2017 and April 8, 2022 to identify any cases that required follow-up enhancement. Primary SMILE was performed using Visumax 500 kHz femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). All enhancements were performed with alcoholassisted PRK, using a WaveLight EX500 excimer laser (Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX). Results: Four hundred and five eyes underwent primary SMILE, of which 15 later underwent PRK enhancement (enhancement rate of 3.7%). No significant difference in pre-SMILE data was identified between the enhancement and non-enhancement groups. The average age of those who underwent PRK enhancement was 33.8±6.3 years old and ranged from 25 to 45. Following primary SMILE, 13 eyes (87%) had an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/40 or better, and none had a UDVA of 20/20 or better. After one year of post-enhancement follow-up, all eyes had a UDVA of 20/40 or better, and 13 eyes (87%) had a UDVA of 20/20 or better (Figure 1). All were within one diopter of target spherical equivalent (SEQ), 13 (87%) were within 0.50 D, and 10 (67%) were within 0.25 D. Of those with 12-month follow-up data, none had UDVA worse than corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and none had lost lines of CDVA. Efficacy and safety indices were 1.03 and 0.99, respectively. Conclusion: Following SMILE, ophthalmologists may anticipate an enhancement rate of one to seven percent. In these cases, PRK is a safe and effective procedure for enhancement of SMILE.

Turner Syndrome (TS) is the most common sex chromosome abnormality in females and is associated with physical changes, hormone deficiencies, increased risk of autoimmune disease, and ocular complications. In this article, we review the main ocular findings associated with TS and discuss their significance for the patient considering refractive surgery. We also present four cases of TS to highlight the clinical findings that may be present in these patients. The most common ocular manifestations include refractive errors, strabismus, and amblyopia. Less commonly, patients with TS may present with keratoconus, cataracts, glaucoma, uveitis, or other disorders of the posterior segment. When considering corneal refractive surgery in a TS patient, clinicians should perform a thorough ocular history, ask patients about hormone therapy and autoimmune conditions, and pay particular attention to any of the associated ocular symptoms of TS.