Case Report of Quarter–Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty for Fuchs Endothelial Dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe a further modification of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK), using a quarter of an untrephined full-size donor Descemet membrane (DM) sheet ("Quarter-DMEK"). METHODS: A 58-year-old patient underwent Quarter-DMEK for Fuchs endothelial dystrophy in his pseudophakic right eye, with a single quadrant of a full-size, 11.5-mm-diameter DM graft. RESULTS: Best-corrected visual acuity improved from 20/50 (0.4) before surgery to 20/40 (0.5) at 1 day, 20/30 (0.7) at 1 week, 20/25 (0.8) at 1 month and 20/20 (1.0) at 3 months after surgery. Central endothelial cell density decreased from 2700 cells/mm before surgery to 1551 cells/mm at 1 week, 1104 cells/mm at 1 month, and 846 cells/mm at 3 months after surgery. Pachymetry returned to normal values within the first month. No complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Quarter-DMEK may give fast visual rehabilitation within the first month similar to visual outcomes after circular DMEK or semicircular DMEK (hemi-DMEK). If long-term endothelial cell density would prove acceptable in a larger number of cases, quarter-DMEK may have the potential to quadruple the availability of donor endothelial tissue for endothelial keratoplasty.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".