The “Two-Flaps” Technique for Descemet Stripping Only
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The success of Descemet stripping only (DSO) is optimized by performing a well-centered, accurately sized diameter of descemetorhexis with a smooth curvilinear border. To achieve this success, we describe a repeatable and relatively straightforward technique to optimize this descemetorhexis for DSO. METHODS: The "two-flaps" technique uses the Gorovoy DSO forceps. The technique takes advantage of the flat and smooth surface of the forceps to create the desired 4-mm Descemet stripping with minimal stromal trauma along with a continuous curvilinear descemetorhexis, minimizing the risk of postoperative stromal scarring and extension of the rhexis beyond 4 mm. RESULTS: This technique has been used successfully in 11 cases performed by 1 surgeon or directly supervised by him. All cases achieved the desired 4-mm circumference without any residual tags or visually significant stromal scarring, with successful clearing of the central cornea and endothelial cells repopulating the central stripped area. CONCLUSIONS: This technique described provides a consistent, reproducible, and relatively trauma-free peeling of Descemet membrane and associated endothelial cells/guttae to optimize the success of DSO.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".