ULTRASOUND BIOMICROSCOPY OF SCLEROTOMY SITES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To study the difference in the amount of vitreous incarceration between conventional pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and PPV with vitreous shaving around sclerotomy sites. METHODS: A dynamic in vivo examination using ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) was performed on the sclerotomy sites of 22 eyes after PPV. Patients were divided into two groups. In the study group (n = 11), the vitreous was completely shaved from the internal initial sclerotomy by cotton-tip depressed vitrectomy under coaxial illumination. In the control group (n = 11), no vitreous shaving was performed. RESULTS: Vitreous incarceration into sclerotomy sites was significantly less in the study group compared with the control group (P <0.001). No difference was seen among the three sclerotomy sites regarding vitreous incarceration within individual eyes. No difference was seen between eyes operated by right- and left-handed surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Vitreous shaving of sclerotomy sites using depressed vitrectomy significantly reduces vitreous incarceration. This may reduce the rate of sclerotomy-related complications following PPV in selected cases.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".