Inferior orbital fissure release to access the inferolateral orbital apex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe release of the inferior orbital fissure (IOF) as a novel surgical technique that will improve access to the inferior and inferolateral orbital apex. DESIGN: Laboratory investigation. PARTICIPANTS: Human cadaver heads. METHODS: Cadaveric dissection study whereby the technique of an IOF release was performed. A swinging eyelid preseptal approach was used to enable a subperiosteal dissection to the orbital floor without obstruction from orbital fat prolapse. A plane was dissected between periorbita and Muller's muscle, the smooth muscle that overlies the entire length of the IOF. Measurements were taken in the sagittal plane from a point on the inferior orbital rim directly above the infraorbital foramen to the most posterior aspect of the orbital floor. RESULTS: Fifteen orbits from 8 cadaver heads were dissected with the aid of a rigid 0-degree endoscope and microsurgical instruments. This study demonstrated that an additional 10.93 ± 2.10 mm of access to the orbital apex was gained after the release of periorbita from the IOF. CONCLUSION: We propose that the IOF release can be adopted as an adjunctive technique to orbital surgery of the inferior and inferolateral orbital apex.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".