SEQUENTIAL PNEUMATIC RETINOPEXIES FOR THE TREATMENT OF PRIMARY INFERIOR RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENTS WITH INFERIOR BREAKS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate a new approach of sequential pneumatic retinopexies for the management of inferior rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RD) with inferior breaks. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective consecutive case series of inferior RDs caused by retinal breaks located within the inferior 4 clock hours treated with sequential pneumatic retinopexies, 24 to 48 hours apart. A total of 26 patients with inferior RDs secondary to one or more breaks between the 4 o'clock and 8 o'clock meridians were included from September 2007 to February 2012. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration was 35.3 weeks. Anatomical success at 8 weeks was achieved in 65.4% of all patients (including those with giant retinal tear and patients with previous RD in the study eye). When excluding patients with giant retinal tear and previous RD in the study eye, the anatomical success rate increased to 70%. Overall, the mean visual acuity improved from 1.00 logMAR (Snellen equivalent 20/200) at baseline to 0.38 logMAR (Snellen equivalent 20/50) at last follow-up. CONCLUSION: Sequential pneumatic retinopexy offers a new viable surgical option for the treatment of RDs secondary to inferior breaks.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it