OUTCOMES OF PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY FOR MACULAR HOLE IN PATIENTS WITH UVEITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Inflammatory macular hole is a rare complication of uveitis, and data on surgical outcomes of closure are scarce. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the anatomical and visual outcomes of conventional pars plana vitrectomy for patients with uveitis. METHODS: Noncomparative, interventional, and consecutive case series from 6 vitreoretinal surgical centers from 2007 to 2015. Twenty eyes of 19 patients were included with 4 patients separated as viral retinitis. The primary outcome was change in best-corrected visual acuity at Month 3. Secondary outcomes were closure of the macular hole and postoperative optical coherence tomography characteristics. RESULTS: All eyes underwent conventional three-port pars plana vitrectomy with indocyanine green-assisted internal limiting membrane peeling. Mean Snellen best-corrected visual acuity improved from 20/200 to 20/63 (P = 0.01 for a difference in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) at Month 3. Twelve (75%) of patients achieved 2 or more lines of visual acuity improvement by postoperative Month 3. Surgery resulted in decreased epiretinal membrane (P = 0.002), intraretinal fluid (P < 0.001), subretinal fluid (P = 0.029), central subfield thickness (P < 0.001), and central cube volume (P = 0.041). Surgical intervention achieved anatomical success, as measured by macular hole closure, in 13 (81%) of patients at postoperative Month 3. CONCLUSION: Patients with inflammatory macular hole respond well to conventional surgery, with good anatomical and visual acuity outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".