MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992640827 · doi:10.1097/iop.0b013e31816b99df

The Round-Tipped, Eyed Pigtail Probe for Canalicular Intubation: A Review of 228 Patients

2008· review· en· W1992640827 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNasolacrimal Duct Obstruction Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePigtailIntubationSurgeryTearing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness and outcomes of canalicular intubation with the use of a round-tipped, eyed pigtail probe. METHODS: Retrospective interventional case series of 228 patients requiring intubation of the canalicular system. Patients were treated surgically with attempted repair of the canalicular system with the round-tipped, eyed pigtail probe. The main outcome measures were successful intubation of the lacrimal system, symptoms of tearing, clinical functional evaluation of lacrimal system, complications, and need for further lacrimal surgery. RESULTS: Of 228 patients, 222 (97.4%) had their canalicular systems successfully intubated with silicone tubing using the round-tipped, eyed pigtail probe. Follow-up was obtained in 191 (86%) of the 222 patients. One-hundred sixty of 191 (83.8%) patients were irrigated and found to be anatomically patent (of the remainder, one was blocked whereas 30 were too young to be irrigated). One hundred fifty-two of the 191 (79.6%) patients had no tearing by history. Thirty-two (16.7%) had occasional tearing on some days that was not bothersome. Seven (3.7%) had intermittent or persistent tearing on a daily basis. Sixty-seven of the 191 (35%) had their lacrimal system more extensively assessed using the dye disappearance test, Jones I test, Jones II test, and canalicular probing. Anatomic patency in this subgroup was demonstrated in 66 of 67 (98.5%) of patients. The dye disappearance test, however, revealed slight asymmetry in 24 of 53 patients (45%) with canalicular lacerations yet only 14 of these 24 (58%) had any symptoms of tearing, indicating some discrepancy between subjective and objective assessment of tearing postcanalicular repair. Fifty-three of the repaired trauma patients underwent probing of the involved and uninvolved canalicular systems. In no patient was a stricture or blockage involving the uninvolved canaliculus identified. Additional lacrimal surgery (dacryocystorhinostomy) was performed on 2 of 191 (1%) patients with greater than 3 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: The round-tipped, eyed pigtail probe can help safely and effectively identify and repair canalicular lacerations. Symptomatic tearing was infrequent; the lacrimal systems showed complete anatomic patency in the majority of patients tested, and need for further lacrimal surgery was rare following pigtail probe intubation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.270 · 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