Noninfectious inflammatory reaction to a gold weight eyelid implant: A case report and literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upper eyelid loading with a gold weight is a generally well-tolerated procedure that helps reduce corneal exposure in patients with lagophthalmos. Complications of this procedure are infrequent. The authors present a rare case of a noninfectious inflammatory response to an eyelid gold weight implant in a 48-year-old woman and summarize all previously published cases. This particular patient presented with incomplete left eyelid closure secondary to a trauma. After having a gold weight inserted into her eyelid to improve closure, she returned with edema and erythema of the eyelid. The inflammation did not respond to oral antibiotics; however, oral steroid therapy resulted in prompt resolution of her symptoms. Her symptoms recurred after discontinuing steroid use and she subsequently required removal of her gold weight implant for permanent resolution of her eyelid inflammation. Although rare, this reaction poses a serious management issue, because it does not respond to antibiotics or short-term steroid use and, in most cases, requires removal of the gold implant.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".