Safety and efficacy of Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation in refractory glaucomas in Northern Indian eyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of Ahmed glaucoma valve (AGV) implantation in refractory glaucoma in Northern Indian eyes. BACKGROUND: The success rate of trabeculectomy remains low in cases of refractory glaucoma even with the use of antifibrotics. Glaucoma drainage devices have proven to be more efficacious in reducing intraocular pressure (IOP) in these glaucomas. METHODS: Retrospective records of 55 consecutive patients who underwent AGV implantation at Dr. Shroff's Charity Eye Hospital, New Delhi, India from January 2003 to December 2012 were reviewed. Pre-operative data included age, gender, eye laterality, specific diagnosis, number of anti-glaucoma medications, number of prior incisional surgeries, visual acuity and IOP on medical treatment. Postoperative data included visual acuity and IOP on day one, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and yearly thereafter, number of anti-glaucoma medications, any complication or additional surgical intervention required. Success was defined as IOP >5 and <22 mmHg with or without treatment. RESULTS: Mean IOP decreased from 39.71 ± 8.99 pre-operatively to 17.52 ± 5.72 mmHg at last follow-up (p < 0.001) and number of medications reduced from 3.27 ± 0.84 to 1.25 ± 0.88 (p < 0.001). Visual acuity remained within one Snellen line or improved at last follow-up in 47 cases (85.4%). The cumulative probability of success was 85.45% at 1 year and 79.63% at 3 years. The incidence of post-operative complications was 25.45%. CONCLUSION: AGV implantation has proven to be safe and is effective in controlling IOP in refractory glaucoma in Northern Indian eyes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".