ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CYSTIC CHANGES AFTER EPIRETINAL MEMBRANE SURGERY WITH INTERNAL LIMITING MEMBRANE REMOVAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Purpose: To assess the prevalence and significance of cystic changes after internal limiting membrane peeling during epiretinal membrane surgery. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on 64 patients who underwent pars plana vitrectomy with membranectomy for idiopathic epiretinal membrane between January 2010 and January 2012 by a single physician. Pars plana vitrectomy alone (Group 1, n = 32) or in combination with phacoemulsification (Group 2, n = 32) was performed. Peeling of the epiretinal membrane was assisted by triamcinolone, and internal limiting membrane was peeled up to the vascular arcades with the aid of brilliant blue dye. Results: In Group 1, best-corrected visual acuity in logMAR (Snellen) improved from 0.53 ± 0.29 (20/68) at baseline to 0.23 ± 0.22 (20/34) at 6-month follow-up (P < 0.001). Two cases (6.3%) developed new cystic changes within the inner nuclear layer; however, there was no significant difference in best-corrected visual acuity at 6 months (P = 0.475). In Group 2, best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.41 ± 0.17 (20/51) at baseline to 0.18 ± 0.15 (20/30) at 6 months (P < 0.001). Eight cases (25%) developed new inner nuclear layer cystic changes; however, there was no significant difference in best-corrected visual acuity at 6 months (P = 0.894). Conclusion: Development of new inner nuclear layer cystic changes after epiretinal membrane surgery may be a frequent finding, but in contrast to cystoid macular edema, it does not seem to affect visual recovery and should be observed. The combination of pars plana vitrectomy with cataract extraction may increase the risk of inner nuclear layer cystic changes. Cystic changes after epiretinal membrane surgery and inner limiting membrane peeling are frequently encountered. The combination of pars plana vitrectomy with cataract extraction may increase the risk of cystic changes in the inner retina. The authors evaluate the prevalence of these histoarchitectural retinal changes and their functional impact.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".