Intraocular pressure following phacoemulsification in patients with and without exfoliation syndrome: a 2 year prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the long term intraocular pressure (IOP) response to phacoemulsification in patients with and without exfoliation syndrome (XFS). METHODS: Prospective, multicentre, cohort study with the following inclusion criteria: age over 50 years, open iridocorneal angle, and cataract. Two groups were enrolled: those with XFS and those without. The main outcome was mean IOP reduction 2 years after phacoemulsification cataract extraction (PCE). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: 183 patients were enrolled, 71 with and 112 without XFS. There were 29 patients with glaucoma in both groups. Mean baseline IOP was higher in XFS compared to control eyes (17.60 (SD 3.23) mm Hg v 16.08 (3.18) mm Hg, p = 0.002). Overall IOP reduction was significantly greater in the XFS group at the 2 year time point (-1.85 mm Hg v -0.62 mm Hg in the controls (p = 0.0037)). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the IOP lowering effect in the XFS group may be related to irrigation volume at the time of surgery. In the subgroup analyses IOP lowering was significantly greater in the XFS and XFG patients than in controls without glaucoma, and POAG controls, respectively. The percentage of patients with a postoperative IOP spike was similar and relatively high in both XFS and control groups (34% v 25%; p = 0.54). CONCLUSION: IOP decreases more in patients with XFS following PCE compared to control eyes without XFS. This effect is more pronounced in glaucoma patients and persists for at least 2 years.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".