Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose To present preliminary results on the implantation of biosynthetic corneal grafts into human corneas. Methods Ten collagen biosynthetic corneas were implanted into human corneas by deep lamellar keratoplasty and have been followed for 6 months. Nine of the patients initially had keraatoconus and one had a scar following a bacterial keratitis. The eyes recieved a postoperative treatment of topical steroids and antibiotics for 1‐2 moths. The patients were analyzed clinically, photographed, and tested for sensitivity. They were examined with pachymetry, in‐vivo confocal microscopy, and anterior segment OCT. Results Following implantation the sutures were removed typically after 5‐6 weeks. During the 6 months follow‐up the vision improved and the graft surface became more even. After 6 months nerves started to emerge and cellular invasion of the constructs could be identified to a varying degree. Some thinning of the grafts was identified which appeared to be an adaptation to the host corneal thickness. Of the 10 patients one suffered a minor bacterial keratitis at the edge of the graft and one patient was temporarily treated using an amniotic membrane coverage to achieve epithelialization of the surface. Conclusion The constructs used were well‐integrated into the recipient corneas. They are biocompatible without appearant untoward reactions. The surface is readily covered with epithelium and the nerves are staring to re‐emerge. Thinning may be a concern but this can be adjusted for by altering the graft material.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".