Five-Millimeter-Incision Deep Lamellar Endothelial Keratoplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate visual acuity, topography, and endothelial cell density 1 year after deep lamellar endothelial keratoplasty (DLEK) for endothelial dysfunction. METHODS: This is a prospective, comparative, interventional case series. Thirty-five eyes of 35 patients who had undergone DLEK with a 5-mm incision and had a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Main outcome measures were best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), astigmatism, topographic regularity and symmetry, and endothelial cell density. RESULTS: : One year postoperatively, BSCVA was 0.33 +/- 0.12 (mean, 20/60; range, 20/40-20/400) compared with 0.15 +/- 0.15 preoperatively (mean, 20/200; range, 20/70-20/800). Six patients did not reach an acceptable visual acuity and were not included in the mean BSCVA, 2 had a primary failure, and the others had preexisting glaucoma or macular disease. Spherical equivalent was -0.04 +/- 1.2 D, refractive astigmatism was 1.76 +/- 1.69 D, surface regularity index was 0.97 +/- 0.54, and surface asymmetry index was 1.25 +/- 0.78 1 year after surgery. Mean endothelial cell count from the donor was 2904 +/- 559 (range, 4694-2111) and 1 year after surgery was 1595 +/- 662 (range, 702-3040), equating to 45% cell loss (range, 15%-77%). CONCLUSIONS: DLEK is a newer method to replace the endothelium in patients with Fuchs dystrophy. Results showed minimal astigmatism, good topographic parameters, and acceptable visual acuity. Endothelial cell loss at 1 year was significant.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".