Phacoemulsification and foldable intraocular lens implantation combined with 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness, technical feasibility, outcomes, and complications of phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation combined with 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy. SETTING: Ophthalmology Department, Calderdale Royal Hospital, Halifax, United Kingdom. METHOD: This retrospective noncomparative interventional case series evaluated the results of 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy combined with phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. Primary outcome measures included suture, complication, and hypotony rates; logMAR visual acuity; and intraocular inflammation. RESULTS: Sixty consecutive patients (60 eyes) were included. The mean visual acuity was 0.87 logMAR +/- 0.68 (SD) preoperatively and 0.46 +/- 0.34 logMAR 6 weeks postoperatively; the improvement was statistically significant (P<.0001). The 23-gauge ports were self-sealing in all eyes but 4 (6.7%), in which a single pars plana port was sutured. The mean intraocular pressure was 24.0 +/- 15.6 mm Hg 1 day postoperatively. Eight eyes (13.0%) had postoperative hypotony (<10 mm Hg); all recovered spontaneously within 24 hours. Of the eyes in which long-term tamponade was not necessary (n =12), all 3 with no endotamponade and 3 of 9 with air tamponade had postoperative hypotony; the difference was not statistically significant (P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Combined transconjunctival sutureless vitrectomy and phacoemulsification was effective and safe in managing simultaneous cataract and vitreoretinal pathology. The self-sealing incisions did not adversely affect the overall surgical or visual outcomes, led to faster visual rehabilitation, and reduced ocular inflammation. The use of air tamponade when no long-term endotamponade was necessary appeared to reduce the risk for hypotony.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".