A novel bilayered expanded polytetrafluoroethylene glaucoma implant creates a permeable thin capsule independent of aqueous humor exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of these studies was to evaluate clinical, functional, and histopathological features of glaucoma drainage implants (GDIs) fabricated from novel, custom‐tailored expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE). Implants of matching footprints were fabricated from silicone (Control) and novel, bilayered ePTFE. ePTFE implants included: (a) one that inflated with aqueous humor (AH) (High), (b) one that inflated with a lower profile (Low), (c) an uninflated implant not connected to the anterior chamber (Flat), and (d) one filled with material that did not allow AH flow (Filled). All implants were placed in adult New Zealand White rabbits and followed over 1–3 months with clinical exams and intraocular pressure. The permeability of tissue capsules surrounding GDIs was assessed using constant‐flow perfusion with fluoresceinated saline at physiologic flow rates. After sacrifice, quantitative histopathological measures of capsule thickness were compared among devices, along with qualitative assessment of cellular infiltration and inflammation. Capsular thickness was significantly reduced in blebs over ePTFE (61.4 ± 53 μm) versus silicone implants (193.6 ± 53 μm, p = .0086). AH exposure did not significantly alter capsular thickness, as there was no significant difference between High and Filled (50.9 ± 29, p = .34) implants. Capsules around ePTFE implants demonstrated permeability with steady‐state pressure: flow relationships at physiologic flow rates and rapid pressure decay with flow cessation, while pressure in control blebs increased even at low flow rates and showed little decay. Perfused fluorescein dye appeared beyond the plate border only in ePTFE implants. ePTFE implants are associated with thinner, more permeable capsules compared to silicone implants simulating presently used devices.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".