Stacked implantation of two prosthetic iris devices for patients with iris defects: A modified surgical technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Iris pigment deficiency in patients with oculocutaneous albinism (OCA) often causes debilitating photophobia, which is routinely managed by sequential intracapsular insertion of two aniridia rings. A common concern of this technique is the risk of segment interdigitation, which can lead to intraoperative complications. Observations: In this report, we describe a modified technique through which both rings were stacked together and inserted simultaneously in a 62-year-old male patient with oculocutaneous albinism and a mild cataract. The patient underwent bilateral phacoemulsification followed by implantation of two Morcher 50E aniridia rings simultaneously, prior to IOL implantation behind the implants within the capsular bag. Post-operatively, the patient's photophobia improved dramatically, and there were no post-operative complications. Conclusions and Importance: Simultaneous insertion of two stacked aniridia rings prior to IOL implantation was a safe and successful alternative surgical method for the management of photophobia in patients with oculocutaneous albinism and cataracts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".