Effect of Healon and Viscoat on outflow facility in human cadaver eyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the acute effects of Healon (sodium hyaluronate) and Viscoat (sodium chondroitin sulfate-sodium hyaluronate) on outflow facility in human cadaver eyes and determine which viscoelastic agent is least likely to cause an intraocular pressure (IOP) spike after cataract surgery. SETTING: The Glaucoma Research Lab, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. METHODS: In this prospective paired study, 15 pairs of human cadaver eyes were used. Following the construction of a 3.0 mm scleral tunnel, 0.25 cc of Healon was injected into the anterior chamber of 1 eye and 0.25 cc of Viscoat was injected into the contralateral eye. The viscoelastic agents were removed from both eyes in a standardized fashion and the scleral tunnels closed. The eyes were then perfused at a constant IOP of 8.0 mm Hg, corresponding to 16.0 mm Hg in vivo. Outflow facility (microL/minute [min]/mm Hg) was recorded every 15 minutes for 24 hours using standard methods. RESULTS: Outflow facility in the Viscoat-treated eyes decreased appreciably for the first 3 hours, then recovered somewhat after 12 hours; facility in the Healon-treated eyes showed less of an overall decrease. Over the 24 hour perfusion period, mean outflow facility was 0.037 microL/min/mm Hg +/- 0.015 (SD) in the Viscoat-treated eyes and 0.060 +/- 0.012 microL/min/mm Hg in the Healon-treated eyes. Healon reduced outflow facility significantly less than Viscoat between 3.25 and 10.50 hours postoperatively (P < .05, 2-tailed t test). CONCLUSIONS: Healon reduced outflow facility less than Viscoat between 3.25 and 10.50 hours postoperatively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".