Small-Incision Femtosecond Laser–Assisted Intracorneal Concave Lenticule Implantation in Patients With Keratoconus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of small-incision femtosecond laser-assisted intracorneal concave lenticule implantation (SFII) and penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) in patients with progressive keratoconus. METHODS: All the patients were clinically diagnosed with progressive keratoconus. Twenty patients underwent PKP (PKP group), and 11 patients underwent SFII (SFII group). Visual acuity, intraocular pressure, corneal topography, corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology, anterior segment optical coherence tomography, and in vivo confocal microscopy were analyzed. RESULTS: Vision improved at 3 months postoperatively in the SFII group. In the PKP group, corrected distance visual acuity improved 1 week after surgery. Corneal topography showed a statistically significant decrease in the anterior K1 and K2. Corneal visualization Scheimpflug technology showed that changes in the biomechanical parameters of the SFII group were also statistically different from those of the PKP group. All the grafts from both groups were clearly visible by anterior segment optical coherence tomography observation. The central corneal thickness of both groups was stable during the 24-month study period. In vivo confocal microscopy showed a few dendritic cells in the subepithelial region in the SFII group. At 3 months after surgery, many dendritic cells and inflammatory cells were observed in the basal epithelium and stroma in the PKP group. CONCLUSIONS: Both SFII and PKP surgical procedures resulted in a stable corneal volume and improved visual acuity in this long-term study. SFII was less invasive and more efficient compared with PKP.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".