» Articles » PMID: 31768368

Histopathologic Analysis of Explanted KAMRA Corneal Inlays Demonstrating Adherent Fibroconnective Tissue Scar Formation

Overview
Date 2019 Nov 27
PMID 31768368
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To investigate the histologic composition of opaque membranes associated with corneal intrastromal inlays implanted for the surgical treatment of presbyopia.

Methods: This is an observational case series of KAMRA corneal inlays explanted due to the presence of adherent opaque membranes associated with peri-inlay corneal stromal haze and sent for histopathologic analysis. Routine histology was performed in addition to immunohistochemical staining with myofibroblast and keratocyte markers.

Results: Eleven explanted inlay specimens were received, of which, after histologic processing, four demonstrated suf-ficient cellular material for histopathologic analysis. The opaque membranes surrounding the explanted inlays were composed of fibroconnective tissue, and myofibroblasts (positive for smooth muscle actin immunostain) were the predominant cell type. Immunostaining for the keratocyte marker CD34 was negative, confirming that the membranes were the result of a reactive scar-tissue formation process and not simply normal corneal stroma adherent to the explant.

Conclusions: Corneal inlay implantation can lead to the formation of an adherent fibroconnective tissue membrane, suggesting keratocyte-to-myofibroblast transdifferentiation and reactive fibroconnective tissue scar formation that could potentially impact visual potential. Prospective patients should be counseled regarding the risk of this complication, as this may be associated with some risk of incomplete reversibility of the procedure.

Citing Articles

Explantation of KAMRA Corneal Inlay: 10-Year Occurrence and Visual Outcome Analysis.

Moshirfar M, Lau C, Chartrand N, Parsons M, Stapley S, Bundogji N Clin Ophthalmol. 2022; 16:3327-3337.

PMID: 36237487 PMC: 9553435. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S382544.

References
1.
Malandrini A, Martone G, Canovetti A, Menabuoni L, Balestrazzi A, Fantozzi C . Morphologic study of the cornea by in vivo confocal microscopy and optical coherence tomography after bifocal refractive corneal inlay implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40(4):545-57. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.08.057. View

2.
Whitman J, Dougherty P, Parkhurst G, Olkowski J, Slade S, Hovanesian J . Treatment of Presbyopia in Emmetropes Using a Shape-Changing Corneal Inlay: One-Year Clinical Outcomes. Ophthalmology. 2016; 123(3):466-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.11.011. View

3.
Malandrini A, Martone G, Menabuoni L, Catanese A, Tosi G, Balestrazzi A . Bifocal refractive corneal inlay implantation to improve near vision in emmetropic presbyopic patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015; 41(9):1962-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.01.018. View

4.
Moshirfar M, Desautels J, Wallace R, Koen N, Hoopes P . Comparison of FDA safety and efficacy data for KAMRA and Raindrop corneal inlays. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017; 10(9):1446-1451. PMC: 5596232. DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2017.09.18. View

5.
Mulet M, Alio J, Knorz M . Hydrogel intracorneal inlays for the correction of hyperopia: outcomes and complications after 5 years of follow-up. Ophthalmology. 2009; 116(8):1455-60, 1460.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.05.019. View