Functional Outcomes of Late Posttraumatic Enophthalmos Correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic enophthalmos has debilitating functional consequences, resulting in restriction of ocular motility and diplopia. Surgical correction aims to restore the globe position and ultimately improve function. This study evaluates the functional outcome of posttraumatic enophthalmos repair. METHODS: Patients included in this study had posttraumatic enophthalmos and diplopia requiring enophthalmos repair. Diplopia was graded from 0 (no diplopia) to 4 (constant diplopia) based on the Functional Diplopia Grading Scale. Limitations of eye movements were recorded in the vertical, horizontal, and torsional directions. Data were gathered prospectively at preoperative assessment, postenophthalmos repair, and final follow-up. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2014, 41 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria. Substantial functional improvement, defined as a decrease of greater than or equal to 1 grade of diplopia, was achieved in 65.9 percent of patients (27 of 41) after all surgical interventions. Patients with residual diplopia (34 of 41) after enophthalmos surgery were managed with secondary strabismus surgery (10 of 34) and/or prism glasses (four of 34). After all interventions, vertical restrictions improved from -1.95 ± 1.13 to -1.06 ± 0.98. Horizontal restrictions improved from -0.88 ± 0.62 to 0.59 ± 0.6. Adequate clinical correction of enophthalmos to within 2 mm of the contralateral globe was achieved in 37 of 41. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest case series evaluating functional outcomes of patients undergoing posttraumatic delayed enophthalmos repair. A multidisciplinary care approach resulted in improved globe position and eye movement, and improvement of diplopia. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to better understand and treat this important and challenging problem. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".