Recurrence of Granular Corneal Dystrophy Type 1 After Phototherapeutic Keratectomy, Lamellar Keratoplasty, and Penetrating Keratoplasty in a Single Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the recurrence of granular corneal dystrophy type 1 (GCD1) after penetrating keratoplasty (PKP), anterior lamellar keratoplasty (ALK), deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK), and phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK) in a single population. The time required to achieve best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after each intervention was also analyzed. METHODS: Retrospective review of all patients with GCD1 from a single center between 1989 and 2016. Surgical interventions were performed 50 times on 28 eyes of 15 patients. Data were primarily analyzed through Cox regression modeling with clustering and robust log-rank testing. RESULTS: Significant recurrence occurred most rapidly after PTK (median time 2.7 years) and was most delayed after PKP (13.7 years). Significant recurrence occurred at a similar interval after ALK and DALK (3.7 and 3.2 years, respectively). Significant recurrence-free survival was longer for PKP than for ALK, DALK, or PTK (P = 0.04). The time required to obtain BCVA was shorter in the PTK group (median 1.8 months) than in the PKP and DALK groups (median 5.3 and 8.4 months, respectively; P = 0.03 and P = 0.02). All groups achieved a similar median BCVA (20/25-20/30). CONCLUSIONS: This series indicates that GCD1 recurrence-free survival is longest after PKP with an associated delay in attaining BCVA. Conversely, PTK provided the fastest visual recovery with shorter recurrence-free survival.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".