Combined penetrating keratoplasty and implantation of iris prosthesis intraocular lenses after ocular trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report the outcomes of implantation of intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a prosthetic iris to correct traumatic iris deficiency. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: Case series. METHODS: The medical records of consecutive patients who had had implantation of an Ophtec or Morcher IOL combined with corneal transplantation were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative data collected included demographics, etiology of the iris deficiency, previous surgeries, preoperative eye pathology, and visual acuity. Operative data and postoperative outcomes included visual acuity, subjective perception of glare and photophobia, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The records of 11 patients were reviewed. The corrected distance visual acuity improved from 2.39 logMAR ± 0.53 (SD) preoperatively to 1.50 ± 1.11 logMAR postoperatively (P=.0037). Four (36.4%) of 9 patients reported an improvement in glare sensation; 5 (45.5%) reported no change in glare (P=.99). Postoperative complications included 2 graft rejection episodes in 2 patients during the first year after surgery, 1 case of increased inflammation that required removal of the IOL, and 2 cases of new-onset glaucoma. At the last follow-up visit, the centration and positioning of the IOLs were excellent. There were no cases of IOL dislocation, macular edema, or retinal detachment. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation IOLs with a prosthetic iris in traumatic aniridia improved visual acuity significantly in most patients and reduced photophobia and glare symptoms in many cases. Graft rejection, glaucoma, and postoperative inflammation are possible complications. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".