MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224945148 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.836873

Case Report: Use of Amniotic Membrane for Tectonic Repair of Peripheral Ulcerative Keratitis With Corneal Perforation

2022· article· en· W4224945148 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Eslami, Blanca Benito-Pascual, Saadiah Goolam, Tanya Trinh, Greg Moloney

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal Surgery and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCorneal perforationPerforationSurgeryKeratitisVisual acuityCorneaTransplantationAmnionOphthalmologyCorneal transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To provide a perspective and surgical video demonstration of peripheral corneal ulceration and perforation managed with multilayered amniotic membrane transplantation. Case Reports: Case 1 describes a 48-year-old female with progressive redness and pain, and an inferonasal corneal thinning and perforation in the left eye from peripheral ulcerative keratitis. She underwent conjunctival recession with amniotic membrane inlay and onlay (Sandwich technique) transplantation. The amniotic membrane integrated well, and her Snellen visual acuity improved from 6/21 preoperatively to 6/9 at 3 months post op. Case 2 describes a 78-year-old male with redness and pain with temporal corneal thinning bilaterally and perforation in the right eye from peripheral ulcerative keratitis. Both eyes underwent similar surgical intervention with smooth integration of the amniotic membrane in the cornea and improvement in the visual acuity. Both patients were also started on systemic immunosuppression in collaboration with the rheumatology team. Conclusion: We report successful use of multilayered amniotic membrane transplantation for the treatment of corneal ulceration and perforation. The authors believe the simplicity of the surgical technique, easier access to amniotic membrane tissue, and lower induced post-operative astigmatism all provide advantages over alternative treatment modalities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicCorneal Surgery and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207