Slit-lamp technique of draining interface fluid following Descemet's stripping endothelial keratoplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe a new slit-lamp technique for draining interface fluid to manage complete donor disc detachments following Descemet's stripping (automated) endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK/DSAEK). METHODS: Interventional case series. Five DSEK/DSAEK patients presented on the first postoperative day with complete detachment of the donor lenticule. Slit-lamp biomicroscopy showed interface fluid preventing attachment of the donor disc to the host stromal bed. A new slit-lamp technique is described to drain the interface fluid. This technique involved completely filling the anterior chamber with an air bubble using a 30-gauge needle on a 3 ml syringe. Following this, a 0.12 forceps was used to open the inferior mid-peripheral corneal drainage slit to drain the interface fluid. RESULTS: This technique was successful in draining the interface fluid in all five patients, leading to immediate complete reattachment of the donor disc. CONCLUSION: Donor disc detachments following DSEK/DSAEK can be successfully managed by this slit-lamp technique of draining the interface fluid.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".