Qualitative tear film and conjunctival goblet cell assessment of cats with corneal sequestra
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the tear film qualitatively and conjunctival goblet cell numbers in cats with and without corneal sequestra. ANIMALS STUDIED AND PROCEDURES: This was a prospective evaluation of 11 cats with corneal sequestra and 14 control eyes that were either the contralateral normal eye when the sequestrum was unilateral or from control cats of similar age with no ocular disease. All cats in this study were examined by a veterinary ophthalmologist. The ophthalmic examinations included a neuro-ophthalmic evaluation, Schirmer tear tests, fluorescein staining, tear film break-up times, applanation tonometry, biomicroscopy, and indirect ophthalmoscopy. The palpebral conjunctiva at the dorsal nasal, ventral nasal, dorsal temporal and ventral temporal fornices were biopsied after topical anesthetic was applied to the cornea and conjunctiva. The conjunctival biopsies were fixed in formalin and sectioned routinely and stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and periodic acid-Schiff. These slides were examined by light microscopy by a blinded examiner. Goblet cell numbers were compared to conjunctival basal epithelial cell numbers by region. The goblet cell numbers by region from the eyes with sequestra was statistically compared to those from eyes without sequestra, with a student's paired t-test. Conjunctival swabs were collected from the cats with corneal sequestra and submitted for polymerase chain reaction for Herpes felis, Chlamydia psiitticia, and Mycoplasma felis. The corneal sequestra were removed by surgical keratectomy and fixed and stained routinely, and examined by light microscopy. RESULTS: No neurologic abnormalities were detected in any of the cats. The Schirmer tear tests (eyes with sequestra 14+/-5.1 mm/min; normal eyes 15+/-6.8 mm/min) and intraocular pressures (eyes with sequestra 21+/-6.6; normal eyes 22+/-5.8) were within normal reference ranges for cats. Biomicroscopic examinations revealed varied sizes and depths of brown- and amber-colored corneal sequestra. No abnormalities were noted on indirect ophthalmoscopic examinations. The tear film break-up time was 21 s (+/-12) for the normal eyes (n=14) and 14 s (+/-13) in eyes with corneal sequestra (n=11). The average goblet/epithelial cell ratios by region for the normal eyes and the eyes with sequestra respectively were 0.66, 0.56 for the dorsal nasal fornix, 0.68, 0.57 for the ventral nasal fornix, 0.63, 0.48 for the temporal dorsal fornix, and 0.55, 0.49 for the temporal ventral fornix. There were no significant differences in tear film break-up times and goblet cell numbers in eyes with corneal sequestra and those without sequestra. Three conjunctival swabs from two of 11 cats with sequestra were positive with PCR for Herpes felis virus. These included one cat with bilateral sequestra and one cat with unilateral corneal sequestrum. CONCLUSIONS: The pathogenesis of feline corneal sequestra does not appear to be linked primarily to abnormal goblet cell numbers, qualitative tear film abnormalities, and accelerated tear film break-up time.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».