Multicentred international review of orbital exenteration and reconstruction in oculoplastic and orbit practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Orbital exenteration is a disfiguring procedure reserved for life-threatening malignancies. This study examines the clinical course and outcomes of a large series of patients who underwent orbital exenteration for malignant periocular neoplasms. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent orbital exenteration from 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2015 at four tertiary referral centres in the USA, Australia and Canada. Demographics, indication for surgery, pathology, surgical technique, reconstruction type and outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: Orbital exenteration was performed on 102 patients. The mean age at surgery was 67.5 years. The most common malignant tumours encountered were squamous cell carcinoma, melanoma and basal cell carcinoma. Seventy-six patients (75%) underwent reconstruction with a local myocutaneous flap, twelve with partial-thickness skin grafts (PTSG), or split skin graft, two had a free flap, and one had a dermis fat graft. Sixteen patients had combined procedures of two of the above. Complete removal of the tumour was achieved with clear margins in 81 cases. Of all patients, 72% were alive at 48 months or more. CONCLUSION: The majority of orbital exenterations performed in this series were secondary to periocular malignancies with unsuccessful/insufficient previous treatments. Regional myocutaneous flaps, PTSG, full-thickness skin grafts and dermis fat grafts were all highly effective and durable reconstructive options, and were able to withstand radiation therapy without complications.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it