Adrenergic Receptors in the Ptotic Human Eyelid: Correlation With Phenylephrine Testing and Surgical Success in Ptosis Repair
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 investigate the relationship between adrenergic receptors in Müller muscle and response to phenylephrine testing in patients undergoing ptosis surgery. This study also compares outcomes of Fasanella and Putterman approaches to posterior ptosis repair. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 71 patients undergoing posterior ptosis surgery. Eyelid height was measured before and after phenylephrine. Müller muscle was examined for alpha-1D, alpha-2C, beta-1, and beta-2 receptors. Specimens were graded on receptor staining intensity. Patients were seen 1 week and 6 weeks following surgery. Surgical outcomes were scored on a scale of 1 (most favorable) to 3 (least favorable). RESULTS: Adrenergic receptors were found in decreasing order: alpha-1D, beta-1, alpha-2C, and beta-2. Receptor grade significantly predicted eyelid height for alpha-2C receptors (p = .03). Mean outcome scores for 36 Putterman (1.10) and 35 Fasanella (1.27) procedures were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Alpha 1D, alpha-2C, and beta-2 receptors are documented within human Müller muscle. Human eyelid elevation response to phenylephrine is inversely related to the amount of alpha-2C receptor staining in Müller muscle. Fasanella and Putterman procedures have equal outcomes, independent of adrenergic receptors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it