Long-term Outcomes of Cataract Surgery in Patients With Chronic Ocular Graft-Versus-Host Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of cataract surgery in patients with chronic ocular graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 77 eyes of 42 patients with chronic ocular GVHD that underwent cataract surgery between January 2014 and February 2020 in a tertiary institution. RESULTS: Posterior subcapsular cataract was seen in 53 (68.8%) of 77 eyes, with a mean preoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) of 0.61 ± 0.49 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR). Postoperatively, with a mean follow-up of 21 months, CDVA improved to 0.17 ± 0.22 logMAR at the latest visit (P < 0.0001). With latest available refraction, 42 (57.5%) of 73 eyes were within 0.5 diopters of target refraction, and 59 eyes (80.8%) were within 1.0 diopter. Postoperative complications included superficial punctate keratopathy within 1 month postoperatively (19 eyes, 24.7%), posterior capsular opacification requiring yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser capsulotomy (36 eyes, 46.8%), corneal epithelial defect (7 eyes, 9.1%), filamentary keratopathy (5 eyes, 6.5%), cystoid macular edema (3 eyes, 3.9%), and infectious crystalline keratopathy (1 eye, 1.3%). Lower preoperative National Institutes of Health ocular GVHD severity scores were associated with a better postoperative CDVA (grade 1, 0.13 ± 0.16 logMAR; grade 2, 0.16 ± 0.23 logMAR; and grade 3, 0.36 ± 0.21 logMAR; P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Cataract surgery improves visual acuity long term in most patients with chronic ocular GVHD. Close postoperative monitoring is important to detect ocular surface inflammation secondary to chronic ocular GVHD, particularly in severe ocular GVHD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".