Role of descemet's stripping without keratoplasty in management of endothelial disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize recent literature on Descemet's stripping only (DSO) in management of endothelial disease with particular focus on Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD). RECENT FINDINGS: DSO is currently indicated in patients with early FECD, central guttae, and preserved peripheral corneal endothelial cell (CEC) count. Time to corneal clearance may be accelerated and maintained with addition of topical rho-kinase inhibitor (ROCKi). There are reports describing successful use of DSO to treat endothelial disease due to iatrogenic trauma. In patients with transcription factor 4 gene mutation, increased cytosine, thymine, guanine (CTG) triplet repeat load may be associated with DSO failure risk. Emerging pharmacotherapies and cell-suspension treatments may improve procedure effectiveness and expand clinical indications. SUMMARY: DSO can be used as the initial surgical treatment in management of symptomatic endothelial disease due to FECD where peripheral CEC function appears preserved. Stand-alone DSO or DSO combined with cataract surgery is effective and postoperative topical ROCKi supplementation will improve time to corneal clearance and CEC count.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".