Femtosecond Laser-assisted Penetrating Keratoplasty
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the stability of different wound configurations for full-thickness penetrating keratoplasty (PK) by using the femtosecond laser in a laboratory model. METHODS: Twenty-two human corneoscleral rims were mounted on an artificial anterior chamber and underwent full-thickness keratoplasty with the femtosecond laser to create different wound configurations. Five samples were assigned to the traditional PK group, 5 to the "top hat" group, 4 to the "mushroom" group, 4 to "zig zag," and 4 to the "Christmas tree" wound configuration. Wound bursting pressure was evaluated after placement of 4, 8, and 16 interrupted sutures. RESULTS: In the traditional PK group, leakage occurred at 0 +/- 0, 21.6 +/- 2.5, and 49 +/- 6.6 mm Hg after placement of 4, 8, and 16 sutures, respectively. No statistically significant difference was noticed in burst pressure with the zig zag and Christmas tree wound configuration compared with the traditional PK group. In the top hat and mushroom groups, burst pressure was 102 +/- 16.8 (P = 0.008) and 65.8 +/- 5.3 (P = 0.03) mm Hg, respectively, after placement of the 16 sutures. CONCLUSIONS: The femtosecond laser-assisted top hat wound configuration for PK was found to be the most mechanically stable compared with the traditional method and mushroom, zig zag, and Christmas tree configurations.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 it