Corneal Transplant Tolerance of Cryopreservation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To study the outcome of corneal transplants performed with cryopreserved tissue. METHODS: Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital medical records of all corneal transplantations performed with cryopreserved tissue by one surgeon (M.L.F.) between March 1978 and April 1991 were reviewed. The Kaufman--Capella cryopreservation technique was used. Corneas were cryopreserved for periods of 3 days to 16.8 years (mean, 4.6 years) before transplantation. RESULTS: We report a mean follow-up of 54 months (range, 2.8--151.3 months). Survival analysis showed the probability of a clear graft to be 76% at 1 year and 73.2% at 2 years. At the time of the last visit, visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 61 eyes (49.2%). The mean postoperative pachometry was 0.58 mm (range, 0.50--0.75 mm). Specular microscopy performed in 57 eyes showed a mean endothelial cell count of 938 cells/mm(2) 55.1 months (range, 2.9--151.3 months) after surgery. For comparison purposes, the outcome of a subgroup of cryopreserved (n = 33) and noncryopreserved (n = 26) corneas transplanted by the same surgeon between April 1986 and April 1990 was studied. CONCLUSION: Despite an increase in the primary failure rate and higher initial endothelial cell loss, cryopreserved transplants are viable. Although we do not recommend cryopreservation of corneas for elective surgery, we consider that cryopreserved corneas can be very useful in emergency situations when tissue availability is a problem.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it