Comparison of Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) and Air Tamponade in Noniridectomized Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of 20% sulfur hexafluoride gas (SF6) and air tamponade in patients who underwent noniridectomized Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent DMEK with either air or SF6 tamponade: 41 eyes received air tamponade (group 1) and 41 received SF6 tamponade (group 2). Best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, endothelial cell density, and complications including graft detachment and elevated intraocular pressure were compared. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 8 ± 4 months in group 1 and 3 ± 2 months in group 2. Mean best spectacle-corrected visual acuity improved from 1.12 ± 0.88 to 0.64 ± 0.78 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) in group 1 (P = 0.009) and from 1.00 ± 0.78 to 0.62 ± 0.53 logMAR in group 2 (P = 0.006). The graft detachment rate was 39% (16 eyes) in group 1 and 42% (17 eyes) in group 2 (P = 0.822). The rate of graft detachment larger than one third of the graft area was 17% in group 1 and 20% in group 2 (P = 0.775). Rebubbling was performed in 26.8% and 20% of eyes in group 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.43). Average endothelial cell loss was 32% in group 1 and 33% in group 2 (P = 0.83). In the immediate postoperative period, elevated intraocular pressure was observed in 2 eyes (5%) in group 1 and in 4 eyes (10%) in group 2 (P = 0.4). There was 1 primary graft failure in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Use of air with it being readily available and short acting is a good method of Descemet membrane tamponade in noniridectomized DMEK.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".