STELLATE NONHEREDITARY IDIOPATHIC FOVEOMACULAR RETINOSCHISIS: RESPONSE TO TOPICAL DORZOLAMIDE THERAPY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report the clinical course of a patient presenting with stellate nonhereditary idiopathic foveomacular retinoschisis (SNIFR) in response to topical Dorzolamide treatment. METHODS: Case report, with multimodal imaging findings, including spectral domain optical coherence tomography and fluorescein angiography. Topical Dorzolamide Hydrochloride 2% drops were used three times per day in the affected eye. RESULTS: We identified a 27-years-old male patient who presented with 1-week history of decreased vision in his left eye. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography of the affected eye showed macular splitting of the inner plexiform layer and outer plexiform layer involving the fovea with no other evidence of a hereditary or acquired predisposing condition. The patient was started on the topical treatment for 6 months with visual improvement from 20/40 to 20/30 in the left eye, after which the decision to stop topical dorzolamide therapy was made. On 3 months of follow-up, visual acuity decreased back to 20/40 in the left eye with an increase in retinal thickening on spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Topical dorzolamide was restarted three times per day in the left eye. At 1-year point after restarting treatment, visual acuity was 20/20 in the left eye, with resolved inner plexiform layer and outer plexiform layer splitting on spectral domain optical coherence tomography in the left eye. CONCLUSION: Stellate nonhereditary idiopathic foveomacular retinoschisis can be a devastating problem causing decrease in vision. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case in the literature to report the complete resolution of SNIFR in response to topical dorzolamide hydrochloride 2% therapy. Further prospective studies are vital to better elucidate our understanding of this new disease identity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".