Surgical Approaches for Implanting Xen Gel Stent without Conjunctival Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vanessa Vera,1 Sebastien Gagne,2 Jonathan S Myers,3 Iqbal Ike K Ahmed4 1Department of Ophthalmology, Unidad Oftalmologica de Caracas, Caracas, Venezuela; 2Départment d’ophthalmologie de, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada; 3Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 4Department of Ophthalmology, University of Toronto, Toronto, CanadaCorrespondence: Vanessa Vera Email vanessaveramd@gmail.comAbstract: The XEN Gel Stent (Allergan Inc., an Abbvie company) is an implant that lowers intraocular pressure by creating a filtration pathway from the anterior chamber to the subconjunctival space, using the same pathway as trabeculectomy. While the primary method for implantation is via ab interno approach, it is also possible to implant the device ab externo. This technique paper details the surgical steps for closed conjunctival implantation of the Gel Stent and provides surgical pearls for enhancing outcomes.Keywords: XEN Gel Stent, glaucoma, filtration surgery, ab interno, ab externo, transconjunctival implantation
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".