MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995089541 · doi:10.4103/ijo.ijo_1201_19

Comments on: Keratoprosthesis optic and carrier corneal graft “noncontact” as a cause of sterile stromal necrosis in a case of Auro KPro implantation

2019· letter· en· W2995089541 on OpenAlexaff
Mona Harissi‐Dagher, Yasmin Awad

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Ophthalmology · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal Surgery and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeratoprosthesisMedicineFungal keratitisOphthalmologyComplicationNecrosisSurgeryCorneaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We read with interest the recently published article by Malhotra et al. about the case of a 50-year-old woman with bilateral, vascularized corneal opacity and associated limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) for which she underwent primary implantation of Auro keratoprosthesis (KPro).[1] KPro was developed to enhance surgical alternatives to the traditional penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Despite better postoperative management and refinement of its design, corneal melting is still a potential complication of Kpro, negatively impacting the prognosis because of its potential impact on visual rehabilitation.[23] Hence, we felt it is important to draw attention to the causes of keratolysis following KPro implantation. Malhotra et al. reported about an area of noncontact observed between the optic front plate and the carrier graft of the Kpro, and they thought it to be conducive to tissue necrosis and ulceration. We would like to elaborate on this, as there are more common causes that have to be evoked. Our study comprised a large cohort of patients with Boston KPro type I, identified the incidence, risk factors, management, and outcomes of keratolysis over a long-term follow-up.[3] In our large cohorts of melts post KPro, the senior author (MH-D) observed that sixteen (14%) of the 110 eyes (96 patients) who underwent KPro implantation developed keratolysis at an average 20 months. Retroprosthetic membrane (RPM) and infectious keratitis were identified in 31% and 25%, respectively and confirmed as significant risk factors. Other melts occurred in the setting of corneal dellen/desiccation (13%) as found in Malhotra's case report or were idiopathic (25%). Patients with keratolysis had higher complication rates and should receive rigorous monitoring. In fact, retinal and choroidal detachment were more common in eyes with keratolysis.[45] Corneal melt may also lead to KPro extrusion, placing the anatomical integrity and function of the globe at risk.[4] Although the incidence rate of corneal melting has been significantly reduced, sterile keratolysis continues to be a significant complication associated with poor visual outcomes and appears more prevalent with longer follow-up. Furthermore, the improvement in the KPro design and development of a safe mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) inhibitor for prophylaxis and treatment are warranted to maximize KPro retention. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of OphthalmologySame topicCorneal Surgery and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207