Outcomes of surgical repair of Retinoschisis-associated retinal detachment compared to Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to compare outcomes of primary retinal detachment (RD) repair in retinoschisis-associated RD (RSRD) and rhegmatogenous RD (RRD). METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study. Charts of 2247 consecutive patients operated for RD repair at the Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec - Université Laval between 2014 and 2018 were reviewed. Patients with RSRD and RRD were included to compare the visual and anatomical outcomes of both groups. RESULTS: There were 41 patients (1.8%) with RSRD and 1661 patients (74%) with RRD. RSRD patients had more primary repair failures (n = 9, 22%, vs. n = 166, 10%; p = 0.013). The primary anatomical success rates for pars plana vitrectomy with and without scleral buckle (PPV-SB vs. PPV) as primary repair method were similar in both RSRD patients (n = 11/14, 79% vs. n = 20/25, 80%; p = 0.92) and RRD patients (n = 751/827, 91% vs. n = 641/721, 89%; p = 0.21). At final follow-up, best corrected visual acuity (VA) in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) was 0.30 [0.10, 0.88] and 0.18 [0.10, 0.40] (p = 0.03) in RSRD patients and RRD patients, respectively. Presence of retinoschisis was associated with worse final VA (β 0.082, p < 0.001). Other predictive variables included female sex, macula-off presentation, number of RD quadrants involved, longer symptoms duration, worse baseline VA, and primary repair failure. The greatest predictors were worse baseline VA, primary repair failure, and macula-off status at presentation. Presence of retinoschisis did not significantly increase risk of primary repair failure in multivariable analysis (OR 1.45, 95% CI: 0.50-4.17; p = 0.49). Symptoms duration was the greatest effect factor associated with for primary repair failure (OR 1.37, 95% CI: 1.12-1.69; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: RSRD is associated with more primary repair failure in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate analysis after adjusting for symptoms duration. It is however associated with worse final VA even after adjusting for primary repair failure. Both PPV and PPV-SB are valid repair methods for RSRD. However, RSRD remains a challenge to treat.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".