VITRECTOMY WITH SUBRETINAL TISSUE PLASMINOGEN ACTIVATOR AND GAS TAMPONADE FOR SUBFOVEAL HEMORRHAGE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To study the prognostic factors and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent pars plana vitrectomy, subretinal injection of tissue plasminogen activator, and gas tamponade for the treatment of subfoveal hemorrhage (SFH). METHODS: A retrospective noncomparative interventional case series. RESULTS: Seventy-eight eyes from 77 patients were included. A total of 84.6% of eyes developed SFH from age-related macular degeneration. Partial or complete displacement of the SFH was achieved in 91.5% of eyes within 2 months of surgery. Visual acuity improved from 20/1,449 preoperatively to 20/390 after a mean follow-up time of 6.3 months, corresponding to approximately 5 lines of Snellen acuity improvement (P < 0.001). Better visual acuity was associated with the absence of age-related macular degeneration (P = 0.02) and less hemorrhage superior to the fovea (P < 0.001). Final visual acuity was not associated with the area of SFH (P = 0.17), use of anticoagulants (P = 0.14), or visibility of the ellipsoid layer by optical coherence tomography (P = 0.64). Nine patients (11.5%) developed a recurrence of SFH within the follow-up period. Recurrence of SFH was not associated with concurrent anticoagulant therapy (P = 0.52). CONCLUSION: An etiology other than age-related macular degeneration with less hemorrhage superior to the fovea predicts a better outcome in patients with SFH treated with pars plana vitrectomy, subretinal tissue plasminogen activator, and gas tamponade.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".