MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029004200 · doi:10.1016/j.ajoc.2020.100752

Ab interno suture tube occlusion of the Baerveldt glaucoma implant for management of postoperative hypotony: A case series

2020· article· en· W3029004200 on OpenAlexaff
André S. Pollmann, Amit V. Mishra, Maria Gabriela Campos-Baniak, R. Rishi Gupta, Brennan D. Eadie

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology Case Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlaucomaOcclusionImplantSurgeryIntraocular pressureFibrous jointLumen (anatomy)ComplicationOphthalmologyVisual acuityGlaucoma surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delayed hypotony can be a vision threatening complication following aqueous shunt surgery in patients with glaucoma. Multiple medical and surgical management strategies have been utilized, but results have been inconsistent. The present case series describes management of delayed hypotony associated with the Baerveldt glaucoma implant (BGI) by surgically introducing 4-0 polypropylene suture into the tube lumen. The cases of four patients who presented with hypotony following BGI surgery were reviewed. Following BGI tube lumen occlusion with suture, sustained intraocular pressure increase (mean 7.25 mmHg, range 4–14) was noted in all patients and visual acuity improved in three cases. This is the first report of ab interno suture occlusion of the BGI for management of post-operative hypotony. Further studies are required to determine the utility of this procedure, but our results suggest that in select patients, ab interno suture occlusion be advantageous in managing delayed hypotony refractive to medical therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology Case ReportsSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207