Surgery for Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG) By Trabeculectomy: Indications and Results in 52 Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: POAG filtering surgery arouses a lot of interest regarding its indications and results in melanoderma subjects south of the Sahara. The aim of this work was to contribute to improving the management of this disease in our socio-economic environment. Material and Methods: Retrospective longitudinal study carried out on the medical records of 47 patients and 52 eyes operated on for primary open-angle glaucoma by trabeculectomy from August 1, 2018, to August 31, 2020 in a private health facility, with postoperative follow-up of at least 1 year, for each case. Results: The patients were aged 10 to 70 years (mean 62.5 +/- 13.81 years), with a male predominance (51.92%). Those who had health coverage were 44 (93.61%). Patients referred by other ophthalmologists for better care were 26 (55.31%). The mean preoperative IOP was 22.67 mm Hg. The surgical indication was the failure of medical treatment marked by visual field degradation associated with uncontrolled IOP in 34 eyes (65.38%) and the patient's desire for 5 eyes (9.61%). And of the 52 operated eyes, 8 (15.39%) were under monotherapy, 30 under dual therapy (57.69%) and 14 (26.92%) under triple therapy. All eyes had undergone trabeculectomy, associated with the use of mitomycin C for the 52 eyes (100%). The postoperative IOP at 1 year of follow-up was between 10- and 15-mm Hg in 98.08% of cases with an average pressure drop of 8.67 mm Hg (38.24%). Conclusion: A common practice of trabeculectomy with a view to refining the indications and mastering both the technique and the management of complications could make it a reliable alternative in the management of POAG in certain patients who are non-compliant or unable to cope the financial cost of medical treatment for life, in our conditions
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".