Two Cases of Spontaneous Filtering Blebs, One Idiopathic and One Associated With Terrien Marginal Degeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report a case of an idiopathic unilateral filtering bleb in an otherwise well patient and a case of bilateral spontaneous filtering blebs in association with Terrien marginal degeneration. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study of 2 cases, clinical notes, ultrasound biomicroscopy and gonioscopy images were reviewed. RESULTS: Case 1: A 32-year-old woman presented with a 1-year history of a gradually growing cyst in her right eye. No changes in vision were reported. The patient had no previous ocular or systemic history, trauma, or surgical interventions. Slit-lamp examination revealed a multilobulated cyst at the supranasal limbus OD. Diagnosis was an idiopathic spontaneous limbal filtering bleb of unclear etiology because there was no inciting event or obvious cause. Case 2: A 31-year-old man, with 2 past episodes of spontaneous filtering bleb development, affecting the left, then the right, eye, presented with his third event in May 2012. The visual acuity was decreased to 20/400 OD. The right eye was hypotonous and ultrasound biomicroscopy confirmed a shallow anterior chamber, a superior peripheral corneal defect, and an echolucent space suggestive of subconjunctival fluid. Limbal thinning was noted bilaterally, consistent with Terrien marginal degeneration. CONCLUSIONS: This is a rare case of an idiopathic filtering bleb occurring in a healthy patient with no precipitating cause, other ocular abnormalities, or physical malformations, and the only reported case of bilateral sequential filtering blebs associated with an atypical presentation of Terrien marginal degeneration.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".