Short-Term Intraocular Pressure Elevations after Combined Phacoemulsification and Implantation of Two Trabecular Micro-Bypass Stents: Prednisolone versus Loteprednol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To compare the effects of prednisolone and of loteprednol after combined phacoemulsification and trabecular micro-bypass stent implantation (phaco-iStent). Methods. Patients who underwent phaco-iStent between April 2013 and November 2014 were identified by retrospective chart review. Postoperatively, they received either prednisolone (n = 38) or loteprednol (n = 58). Baseline data was compared. Primary outcomes including intraocular pressure (IOP) and number of glaucoma medications (NGM) were analyzed at preoperative visit, postoperative day 1, weeks 1-2, weeks 3-4, and months 2-3. Results. Both groups had similar preoperative parameters (p > 0.05). The mean IOP spike occurred at postoperative weeks 1-2 with an increase of 2.21 ± 7.30 mmHg in the loteprednol group and 2.54 ± 9.28 mmHg in the prednisolone group. It decreased by weeks 3-4 in both groups and continued to improve at months 2-3. NGM showed significant reduction (p < 0.0001) after the surgery and remained stable in both groups. No significant group effect or time-group interaction in IOP and NGM evolution was detected (p > 0.05). The proportions of patients needing paracentesis were similar between the two groups. Conclusion. Similar early IOP elevations after combined phaco-iStent occurred with both prednisolone and loteprednol. Facilitated glucocorticoid infusion, altered aqueous humor outflow, and local inflammation may be contributing factors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".