Improvement of 1-Stage Comprehensive Operation Technique for Blepharophimosis-Ptosis-Epicanthus Inversus Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This retrospective case series presents the clinical results of a modified 1-stage comprehensive surgical method for blepharophimosis-ptosis-epicanthus inversus syndrome (BPES). METHODS: A total of 25 patients with BPES underwent a modified reverse Z-plastic surgery method to bisect the epicanthus into 2 unequal V-shaped flaps and suture them alternately. The medial canthus ligament was partially incised, shortened, and sutured; the outer canthus was opened with a V-Y flap. The gray line of the outer canthus was cut to extend the eyelid margin length. Ptosis was corrected using the orbicularis oculi-frontalis composite flap technique. We studied the inner intercanthal distance (IICD), interpupillary distance (IPD), horizontal palpebral fissure length (HPFL), marginal reflex distance 1 (MRD-1), IICD/IPD ratio, IICD/HPFL ratio, Vancouver Scar Scale, and overall postoperative satisfaction. RESULTS: The 25 patients included 12 girls and 13 boys (mean age, 8.3 ± 6.8 years), 19 of whom had a family history of BPES. The mean IPD value was 50.15 ± 7.43 mm. IICD decreased from 39.38 ± 2.39 mm preoperatively to 31.64 ± 2.37 mm postoperatively, IICD/IPD from 0.8 ± 0.1 preoperatively to 0.6 ± 0.1 postoperatively ( P < 0.05), and IICD/HPFL from 1.98 ± 0.33 preoperatively to 1.22 ± 0.10 postoperatively ( P < 0.01). HPFL increased from 20.08 ± 3.53 mm preoperatively to 26.04 ± 1.36 mm postoperatively ( P < 0.01), and MRD-1 from -1.12 ± 0.71 mm preoperatively to 3.24 ± 0.47 mm postoperatively ( P < 0.01). The postoperative Vancouver Scar Scale score was 3.68 ± 1.07. Patient satisfaction was rated as 8.8 ± 1.08, with a relatively high overall satisfaction rate. CONCLUSIONS: The corrective effect on BPES was noticeable, improving the IICD/HPFL and IICD/IPD ratios. Postoperative scars were not evident, and patient satisfaction was high. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".