MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994659643 · doi:10.1097/ijg.0000000000001423

Neodymium Laser Treatment of IOP Rise Following Ex-Press Glaucoma Device Implantation: A Retrospective Review From 4 Institutions

2019· review· en· W2994659643 on OpenAlexaff
Majd Mustafa, Nir Shoham-Hazon, George R. Reiss, Thomas W. Samuelson, Gary Condon, Iqbal Ike K. Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Glaucoma · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsPrism Eye InstituteDalhousie UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlaucomaIntraocular pressureOphthalmologyRetrospective cohort studyGlaucoma surgeryNeodymiumLaser treatmentGlaucoma medicationSurgeryLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PRéCIS:: Our retrospective study examined the use of neodymium laser in 53 eyes with high intraocular pressure (IOP) following Ex-Press filtration device implantation. We found a statistically significant immediate IOP-lowering effect in all eyes, with a mean IOP reduction of 13.34±8.99 mm Hg, and a posttreatment IOP of 14.30±8.57 mm Hg (P<0.0001). Of a subset of 43 eyes on which 6 months follow-up IOP data was available, 28 eyes achieved treatment success (IOP<18 without further surgical interventions) with a mean IOP of 11.39±4.03 mm Hg at 6 months. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report on the use of neodymium laser for treatment of eyes with IOP rise following Ex-Press glaucoma filtration device implantation. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the medical records of 73 patients who underwent Ex-Press device implantation at 4 medical institutions between 2007 and 2015 and subsequently developed an IOP rise. Enrollment criteria included patients with POAG on whom posttreatment IOP data is available. Indications for treatment with neodymium laser were an IOP above target and a flat bleb. To disrupt the presumed microblockage, the neodymium laser was aimed at the axial and relief ports of the Ex-Press device. Applanation tonometry measurements were followed up after neodymium treatment for variable time intervals. Success was defined as an IOP <18 mm Hg at 6 months without further surgical or laser-based glaucoma interventions. RESULTS: A total of 73 charts were reviewed. Twenty patients were excluded due to insufficient data or a diagnosis other than POAG. Data from 53 eyes of the remaining 53 patients was analyzed. The mean duration between Ex-Press implantation and rise in IOP requiring neodymium intervention was 34.2 months (range, 1.1 to 67.2). We found a statistically significant immediate IOP-lowering effect in all eyes, with a mean IOP drop of 13.34±8.99 mm Hg, and a mean posttreatment IOP of 14.30±8.57 mm Hg (P<0.0001). Of a subset of 43 eyes on which 6 months follow-up IOP data was available, 11 eyes required further glaucoma intervention (surgery or laser-based); 4 eyes had an IOP of ≥18 at 6 months. In the remaining 28 successful eyes, a sustained IOP<18 mm Hg was observed at 6 months, with a mean pressure of 11.39±4.03 mm Hg (P<0.0001). Hypotony (IOP<5) occurred in 3 eyes immediately following treatment and self-resolved by 1 week. CONCLUSION: Our retrospective case series suggests that neodymium laser is a potential consideration in eyes with sustained IOP rise after Ex-Press device implantation.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GlaucomaSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207