ROLE OF OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY IN VERIFYING THE SPECIFICITY OF ULTRASONOGRAPHY IN DETECTING SUBTLE SUBRETINAL FLUID ASSOCIATED WITH SMALL CHOROIDAL MELANOCYTIC TUMORS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report the use of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in verifying the specificity of the ultrasonographic "apical double echo" sign in detecting subtle subretinal fluid (SRF) associated with small choroidal melanocytic tumors. METHODS: Retrospective review of consecutive patients demonstrating ultrasonographic "apical double echo," indicative of subtle SRF, who concurrently underwent OCT on initial evaluation of untreated small choroidal melanocytic tumors. Ultrasonography was performed with eyecubed version 3, ophthalmic ultrasound system (Ellex/Innovative Imaging, Inc, Adelaide, Australia) and OCT with spectral-domain OCT, Cirrus HD-OCT, model 4000 (Carl Zeiss; Meditec, Dublin, CA). Optical coherence tomographic images were examined to verify the presence of SRF and to identify other retinal pathology producing apical double echo in the absence of SRF. RESULTS: The study included 36 patients. With OCT, subtle SRF was present at tumor apex and/or margins in 20 patients (55%) and absent in 16 patients (45%). When SRF was present, it was detected at tumor apex only in 3 of 20 patients (14%), gravitated at the inferior margin only in 13 of 20 patients (64%), and at apex and inferior margin in 4 of 20 patients (22%). When SRF was absent, the retina over the tumor showed degenerative cystic changes in 10 of 16 patients (65%), retinal thickening in 4 of 16 patients (25%), and retinal pigment epithelium detachment in 2 of 16 patients (10%), accounting for the ultrasonographic apical double echo. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography showed limited specificity for detecting subtle SRF related to small choroidal melanocytic tumors, with 45% of patients showing ultrasonographic apical double echo in the absence of SRF with OCT. The retinal changes that yielded false-positive results included retinal cystic degenerations, retinal thickening, and retinal pigment epithelium detachment. Optical coherence tomography is preferred to verify the presence of subtle SRF over small choroidal melanocytic tumors, provided that the inferior tumor margin is included in imaging.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".