Autologous limbal transplantation in patients with unilateral corneal stem cell deficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe a surgical technique for autologous limbal stem cell transplantation and the outcome of a series of patients with unilateral stem cell deficiency. METHODS: A report of six consecutive patients who underwent autologous limbal stem cell transplantation is presented. The primary diagnosis included alkali burn (n=3), conjunctival intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) (n=1), recurrent pterygium (n=1), and contact lens induced keratopathy (n=1). The autologous transplanted tissue consisted of peripheral cornea, limbus, and conjunctiva obtained from the contralateral eye. Three of the above patients underwent penetrating keratoplasty in association with auto-limbal transplantation. A significant modification to established techniques was the close monitoring of conjunctival epithelial migration in the immediate postoperative period. If conjunctival epithelium threatened to migrate on to the corneal surface, it was mechanically removed at the slit lamp and prevented from crossing the limbus. This was required in three patients. RESULTS: The mean follow up was 18.8 months. The outcome was satisfactory in all cases: a stable corneal surface was restored and there was a substantial improvement in vision and symptoms. One patient had a primary failure of the corneal allograft associated with glaucoma, and 6 months later developed a retinal detachment. No complications were noted in the donor eye with the exception of one patient who developed filamentary keratitis along the edge of the donor site. CONCLUSION: Autologous limbal transplantation with corneal, limbal, and conjunctival carriers was found to be useful for ocular surface reconstruction, over a mid-term follow up, in patients with unilateral stem cell deficiency. Close monitoring of the migration of conjunctival epithelium in the immediate postoperative period, and preventing it from crossing the limbus, ensured that the corneal surface was re-epithelialised exclusively from epithelial cells derived from the transplanted limbal tissue. This approach should improve the success of this procedure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".