A New, Wider-Diameter Crawford Tube for Stenting in the Lacrimal Drainage System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Purpose To determine whether technology is available to secure a larger-diameter Crawford tube swedged onto the metal Crawford introducer and to use the system in a closed intubation to treat a failed dacryocystorhinostomy. Methods A metal ferrule has been developed to swedge a larger-diameter Crawford tube onto the standard Crawford probe. Seven patients with failed dacryocystorhinostomy procedures were treated with probing and intubation with the use of this larger-tube Crawford system. Results Six of the 7 patients had patent lacrimal systems after the tubes were removed, a result comparable to open revision after a failed dacryocystorhinostomy. In each case, on insertion, the tube remained firmly attached to the Crawford probe and did not dislodge. Conclusions The technology of using a metal ferrule at the junction of the standard Crawford probe and a larger silicone tube was successful in creating a Crawford system with greater dilation capability than the standard Crawford system. The technique of probing and intubation with this larger Crawford system may be a simple alternative to open revision of a failed dacryocystorhinostomy procedure. A wider-diameter Crawford tube set, with a new system for connecting the tube to the olive-tipped probe through a small metal ferrule, has been used without open surgery in recanalizing the lacrimal system after failed dacryocystorhinostomy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".