POSTOPERATIVE PHOTORECEPTOR INTEGRITY AND ANATOMICAL OUTCOMES BASED ON PRESENTING MORPHOLOGIC STAGE OF RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate outer retinal recovery on postoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT) based on presenting morphologic stage of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). METHODS: Retrospective cohort of consecutive primary fovea-involving RRDs, referred from January 2012 to September 2022. Baseline OCTs were assessed for morphologic stage of RRD. Postoperative OCT scans were graded at 3, 6, and 12 months for external limiting membrane, ellipsoid zone and interdigitation zone discontinuity, epiretinal membrane formation and severity, and residual subfoveal fluid. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-one patients were included. Increasing baseline morphologic stage of RRD was significantly associated with external limiting membrane, ellipsoid zone, and interdigitation zone discontinuity at all time points postoperatively ( P < 0.001) and was shown to be an independent predictor of foveal photoreceptor integrity after adjusting for height of detachment, time to surgery, and duration of fovea involvement ( P < 0.001). Earlier stages were associated with residual subfoveal fluid ( P < 0.001). There was no association between the stages of RRD and epiretinal membrane severity. However, late stages presented with earlier development of epiretinal membrane ( P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Increasing morphologic stage of RRD is associated with delayed recovery of outer retinal bands in the first year and faster development of epiretinal membrane after RRD repair. The results of this study suggest that the stages may serve as a prognostic biomarker for postoperative photoreceptor recovery.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".