MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039344770 · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3181a3f41d

Correction of Adhesive Folded Upper Eyelid by Adhesiotomy and Restoration of Volume with Retro–Orbicularis Oculi Fat Flap and Fat Granule Injection

2009· article· en· W2039344770 on OpenAlexaff
Jiaqi Wang, Yirong Wang, Li Yu, Xin Guo, Ling Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrbicularis oculi muscleAnatomyAponeurosisEyelidMedicineDissection (medical)Tarsus (eyelids)Fat padSurgeryAdipose tissue

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sir: Incorrect double eyelid operation could result in complications, such as folds that are too high and sunken/adhesive eyelids.1–3 We applied adhesiotomy, relieved orbital fat, and restored the volume with the retro–orbicularis oculi fat flap to correct the deformation. For a severe condition, fat granules were injected. Good results were obtained. The incision of the upper eyelid was designed under the scar. If there was excessive skin on the upper eyelid, we could resect the skin between the former and the new double line, and the incision could be designed with the principle of attempting to cut the previous scar but avoiding excessive removal. Skin or scar was incised. Dissection was continued below the subcutaneous tissue. The orbicularis oculi muscle was debulked and pretarsal connective tissue and apertor oculi aponeurosis were exposed. Dissection was continued upward from the upper edges of the incision over the tarsal plates, below the orbital septum to completely relieve the adhesion until normal tissue was exposed. The orbital fat that protruded spontaneously should be released. Dissection should be continued laterally upward to expose the lateral extension of the retro–orbicularis oculi fat pad. The fat pad would form an upper pedicle fat flap after tissues are cut off along bilateral borders. The lateral portion of the pedicle should be appropriately and transversely cut to make it rotate medial downward with enough blood supply. Several 6-0 absorbable stitches were placed to fix the fat flap with released orbital fat and fix the lower edge of fat flat with the upper border of the supratarsal (Fig. 1). Damage of the levator aponeurosis should be avoided. Repair should be performed if there is damage. The fat flap should be descended as possible and fixed properly during the operation. Absorbable sutures are placed to fix the lower border of the incision and the outline of the double eyelid is determined. The skin is closed. Lipochondria (from any position of the body) is injected through spaces between stitches. Less than 1 ml for each side is generally suitable. Then, eyelids are flattened and redundant fat is crushed through the spaces between stitches. Gauze covering the eyelids should be taped with slight pressure to reduce errhysis, and removed in 12 to 24 hours. Immediately, normal eyelid movements should be started.Fig. 1.: Preoperatively, folds were located too high and the eyelids were sunken/adhesive.Forty-two cases were treated using this method over the past 2 years. In 10 of them, fat granule injection was added (Figs. 1 and 2). Results were satisfactory.Fig. 2.: Postoperatively, adhesive folded upper eyelids were corrected.For some patients, retro–orbicularis oculi fat was poor or had been removed during a previous operation, and fat granule injection should be performed. It is also different from other fat granule injections. Generally, more than 50 percent of injected fat granules will be absorbed gradually. However, with the existence of the retro–orbicularis oculi fat flap in the upper eyelids, the injected fat granules will not be absorbed within a period of time. Consequently, no matter how much will be absorbed eventually, the upper eyelid will not conglutinate as well. The goals of treatment will be achieved. With the application of fat granule injection, this method was suitable for different levels of deformity. In conclusion, this method is a simple and effective procedure for correction of sunken/adhesive upper eyelids. Jiaqi Wang, M.D. Yirong Wang Li Yu, M.D. Xin Guo Ling Zhang Plastic Surgical Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Ba-Da-Chu Beijing, China

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic & Reconstructive SurgerySame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207