MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754733148 · doi:10.4103/ijo.ijo_702_17

Plication: How apt in application?

2017· letter· en· W2754733148 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pradeep Sharma, Nripen Gaur

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Ophthalmology · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The standard procedure for strengthening/tightening the muscles is resection, which involves the muscle being disinserted and reinserted back at the point of original insertion, after a part being resected.[1] This, however, makes it irreversible, vulnerable to muscle loss/slippage during surgery and, also compromises the anterior segment circulation. Another strengthening procedure involves the plication or the muscle tuck whereby the muscle is double breasted without disinsertion. However, the “muscle-to-muscle” tuck never acquired general interest probably due to the effect of “cheese wiring” leading to a loss of effect over time. Wright revived the interest by changing the technique from muscle-to-muscle to muscle-to-sclera and also demonstrating the relative preservation of anterior segment circulation and its immunity from getting lost in action.[2] Wright[2] insists on the muscle being folded “over the muscle” for better preservation of circulation but the muscle being folded “under the muscle” too has been described and to be safe in human subjects with the help of iris angiograms.[3] Filling defects were seen in all cases of vertical rectus tenotomies (3/3) as compared to 1/4 in the case of vertical rectus plication surgery and none of the cases (0/5) of horizontal rectus plication surgery. This is possibly due to the role of long posterior ciliary arteries, indicating a relative safety of the procedure on horizontal recti. Prabha, et al.[4] describe the comparative outcomes of standard resection procedure with plication of rectus muscles. The authors have shown comparable outcomes of both the procedures. The inflammatory changes have also been found to be comparable among both the procedures in the study. However, they have followed up for a maximum 6–8 weeks and have not described the long-term effects of the procedure. A study comparing the outcomes of plication versus resection showed similar and maintained results on comparing medial rectus resection to plication, but the lateral rectus plication showed 37% loss of effect over time.[5] Another recent study has shown plication to be less effective than resection procedure.[6] The authors have reported a higher rate of undercorrections and reoperations in the plication group. The authors also report a higher association of postoperative drift with plication and blame the use of absorbable sutures for inferior outcomes as the effect of plication may decrease once the sutures dissolve.[6] The other advantage of this procedure is its reversibility in the early postoperative period, and it can be done on adjustable suture for more precision.[7] This surgery can also be done as a minimally invasive strabismus surgery. A mini-plication of just the central 3-4 mm muscle fibers is also described and is easily adjustable too.[8] The current evidence points toward a slightly inferior outcome of plication surgery as compared to standard resection procedure. A long-term prospective study with a larger sample size and also an improved technique to prevent the postoperative drift and loss of effect would be needed to establish this procedure as an effective alternative to standard resections. About the author Prof. Pradeep Sharma is the Professor and Head of Section of Pediatric Ophthalmology, Strabismus and Neuro. Ophthalmology, Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. Prof. Sharma completed his medical and specialty training. MBBS (1979) and MD (1982) from the All India Institute of Medical Sciences. He attained advanced subspecialty fellowship training in Strabismus at UCLA, Los Angeles, USA, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, USA and Richmond Eye Institute, Richmond, USA, awarded by the International Strabismological Association (2001). He is the Fellow of National Academy of Medical Sciences and was the first Asian to deliver the prestigious Knapp Lecture at the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, AAPOS at Vancouver 2016. Other awards to his credit include Col Rangachari Gold Medal (1984) and Dr Athavle Award (2002) of AIOS and named orations at several State Ophthalmological Societies. He is the visiting faculty and surgeon with Orbis International. His rich academic accomplishments include over 100 scientific publications and two books. Strabismus Simplified and Essentials of Ophthalmology. Prof. Sharma is an excellent teacher and a mentor and is elegantly balanced in work and life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of OphthalmologySame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207