ANTERIOR SUBTENON TRIAMCINOLONE INJECTION FOR REFRACTORY MACULAR EDEMA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of anterior subtenon triamcinolone (AST) injections in the management of refractory macular edema. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of consecutive eyes with refractory macular edema treated with AST at a single vitreoretinal surgeon's practice at Toronto Western Hospital, University of Toronto, Canada in 2018 to 2023. Refractory was defined as persistent macular edema with a central subfield thickness of 250 µ m or greater over a 24-week period, receiving at least four intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor injections. Vision outcomes and optical coherence tomography features for all eyes were compared for three visits pre-AST treatment and two visits post-AST treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients (119 eyes); diabetic macular edema (26%), and pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (74%), with a mean follow-up duration of 161 days were included. The presence of subretinal fluid ( P = 0.0013), central subfield macular thickness ( P < 0.0001), cube average thickness ( P = 0.0024), and macular cube volume ( P = 0.0017) significantly improved from pre-AST to post-AST treatment. Visual acuity also significantly improved from pre-AST treatment to post-AST treatment ( P < 0.0001). There was no significant change in the intraocular pressures from pre-AST to post-AST ( P = 0.7920), and no complications were noted throughout the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study suggest that AST injections show modest improvement in anatomical and functional outcomes and are safe for the treatment and management of refractory macular edema.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".