MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969421401 · doi:10.1097/ico.0000000000002117

Poor Long-Term Outcomes of Keratopigmentation With Black Ink for the Treatment of Dysphotopsia Secondary to Laser Peripheral Iridotomies

2019· article· en· W2969421401 on OpenAlexaff
Samir Jabbour, Johanna Choremis, Tanguy Boutin, Isabelle Brunette, Michèle Mabon, Julia C. Talajic

Bibliographic record

VenueCornea · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDepigmentationAdverse effectSurgeryOphthalmologyInternal medicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To report outcomes of keratopigmentation (KP) with commercial black ink in the treatment of dysphotopsia secondary to laser peripheral iridotomies (LPI) using manual anterior stromal puncture (ASP) and manual lamellar pocket (LP). METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of eyes that underwent KP for treatment of dysphotopsia secondary to LPI. Patients' postoperative symptoms were categorized as resolved, improved, no change, or worse. Any intraoperative and postoperative complications were noted, as well as the need for further treatments. RESULTS: Five eyes in 4 patients underwent ASP, and 14 eyes in 13 patients underwent LP. Only 1 patient had improvement in symptoms in the AK group. Four patients had a complete resolution of symptoms after LP, whereas 7 had symptomatic improvement and 3 did not notice any change. Fifty-five percent of patients in the LP group experienced late-onset depigmentation between 3 and 5 years postoperatively. One patient who underwent 2 LP re-treatments experienced irregular corneal steepening with nonprogressive corneal thinning. Overall, there were no serious adverse reactions to the pigment used. CONCLUSIONS: ASP was not suitable for the treatment of dysphotopsia secondary to LPI. In the short term, LP had good outcomes, but commercial black ink was prone to depigmentation at 3 to 5 years postoperatively. We therefore do not recommend the use of such pigment for long-term management of dysphotopsia secondary to LPI.

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 score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorneaSame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207