MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982091312 · doi:10.3928/1081597x-20101223-02

Artiflex Phakic Intraocular Lens Implantation After Corneal Collagen Cross-linking in Keratoconic Eyes

2011· article· en· W1982091312 on OpenAlexaff
Luis Izquierdo, María A. Henríquez, Martin McCarthy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refractive Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal surgery and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratoconusKeratometerDioptreOphthalmologyMedicinePhakic intraocular lensCorneal topographyVisual acuityRefractive errorIntraocular lensCorneal collagen cross-linkingCornea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and stability of the Artiflex (Ophtec BV) foldable anterior iris-claw phakic intraocular lens (PIOL) following corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in select cases of progressive keratoconus. METHODS: This prospective, comparative study, conducted between March 2007 and June 2008, involved 11 eyes with progressive keratoconus. Inclusion criteria were progressive keratoconus (Amsler-Krumeich classification grades I and II) with no corneal opacities, corneal thickness >450 μm, endothelial cell count >2500 cells/mm(2), anterior chamber depth >3.2 mm, spherical equivalent refraction >4.50 diopters (D) (with a cylinder component <2.00 D), and no other treatment for keratoconus other than contact lens. Each patient underwent CXL in the keratoconic eye with implantation of the Artiflex IOL 6 months thereafter. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and refraction and topographic profiles were examined at 1, 6, and 12 months after the CXL procedure. RESULTS: All eyes achieved UDVA of 0.3 logMAR or better. Final spherical and cylindrical error ranged from 0 to -1.50 D and 0 to -1.75 D, respectively. No eyes lost lines of preoperative CDVA. Statistically significant reductions in mean maximum (2.14 D, P<.001) and minimum (1.17 D, P=.02) keratometry values were present 12 months after the CXL procedure. No complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Combined CXL and Artiflex implantation was a safe and effective treatment in this subset of eyes with progressive keratoconus. Good results in terms of visual acuity, postoperative residual refractive error, and keratometry values were identified.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Refractive SurgerySame topicCorneal surgery and disordersFrench-language works237,207