Intermediate-term Outcome and Success of Superior Versus Inferior Ahmed Glaucoma Valve Implantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The superotemporal quadrant is usually the implantation site of choice for glaucoma drainage devices. Inferior placement of glaucoma drainage device is considered technically difficult. The purpose was to determine the success rates, complications, and visual outcome of superior versus inferior Ahmed Glaucoma Valve implantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of the records of 83 eyes (77 patients) that underwent Ahmed Glaucoma Valve surgery from 1997 to 2004. Thirty-one eyes had superior insertion (SI) versus 52 eyes with inferior insertion (II). Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data including intraocular pressure (IOP), visual acuity, and number of medications, and complications were recorded. Success was defined as postoperative IOP between 5 and 21 mm Hg and at least a 20% reduction from baseline IOP. RESULTS: The mean postoperative IOPs at 6 months, 1, 2, 2.5, and 3 years were 13.5+/-3.2 mm Hg versus 12.8+/-3.6 mm Hg (P=0.76), 12.5+/-3.1 mm Hg versus 13.0+/-4.0 mm Hg (P=0.5), 15.7+/-6.2 mm Hg versus 12.6+/-4.7 mm Hg (P=0.06), 13.2+/-3.0 mm Hg versus 12.6+/-3.3 mm Hg (P=0.70), and 14.5+/-3.0 mm Hg versus 13.7+/-5.0 mm Hg (P=0.73) in the SI group versus the II group, respectively. The success rates were similar between the groups over the study period with 87.0% versus 86.5%, 71.5% versus 73.0%, and 71.5% versus 64.6% for SI versus II at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. There were more complications in the II group; however, only wound dehiscence and transient diplopia were statistically significant (P=0.04 and 0.001, respectively). The number of glaucoma medications was lower in the SI during the first 3 months but nonsignificant thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in IOP control between SI and II over 36 months. II should be considered when there are limitations to SI.
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 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".