MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796574636 · doi:10.1177/2474126418769512

Surgical Repair of a Persistent Full-Thickness Macular Fold With Base-to-Base Photoreceptor Apposition Secondary to Hypotony From Trabeculectomy Surgery and Postoperative Laser Suturelysis

2018· article· en· W2796574636 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas S.M. Iaboni, Mark E. Seamone, R. Rishi Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of VitreoRetinal Diseases · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePars planaVitrectomyTrabeculectomyOphthalmologyIntraocular pressureVisual acuityRetinalSurgeryRetinal detachment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To report the successful repair of a persistent full-thickness retinal fold secondary to hypotony from trabeculectomy surgery. Results: Laser suturelysis was performed on a patient to relieve an elevated intraocular pressure posttrabeculectomy surgery. This resulted in chronic hypotony, a full-thickness retinal fold, and a decline in visual acuity to “count fingers.” The patient underwent a pars plana vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling, subretinal injection of balanced saline solution, fluid-air exchange, injection of F-Decalin, peripheral retinotomy, endolaser photocoagulation, and vitreous substitution with 15% C 3 F 8 gas. Anatomic improvement was documented via multimodal imaging. Six months postoperatively best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) returned to 20/30. Conclusions: We describe a surgical approach to full-thickness retinal folds and review the management options previously reported in the setting of hypotony. We provide support for the active management of appositional full-thickness retinal folds involving the fovea and demonstrate that surgical correction can significantly improve BCVA even after 4 months of hypotony.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VitreoRetinal DiseasesSame topicRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207