How I do it: Lateral canthal web revision—single Z-plasty technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lateral canthal webbing is a known complication of blepharoplasty, which occurs when the lateral aspect of the upper blepharoplasty incision is taken below the equator of the lateral canthus. Removing excessive eyelid skin laterally can also result in a lateral canthal web. Currently, there is no standard approach for addressing this complication. METHODS: Retrospective review of single surgeon practice between 2011 and 2019. All patients underwent revision surgery using the proposed single Z-plasty technique. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients referred for lateral canthal web were included in the study. All patients had previous upper lid blepharoplasty, with the initial procedure occurring 8-63 months prior to the referral for revision. The majority of the blepharoplasties occurred in Ontario (n = 19), but some patients also underwent surgery in Alberta (n = 1), British Columbia (n = 1), and United States (n = 1). The initial surgeries were performed by a variety of specialities including plastic surgery (n = 16), otolaryngology (n = 4), ophthalmology (n = 2), and family medicine (n = 1). Following revision surgery using the single Z-plasty technique, all patients reported a subjective increase in functional and aesthetic satisfaction. No further revision surgery was required for any of these patients. CONCLUSION: The single Z-plasty technique is simple, robust, and could be easily incorporated into any cosmetic practice to address this complication of blepharoplasty.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".