Donor Tissue Preservation Time Impact on Keratolimbal Allograft Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study sought to determine the effect of donor preservation time and other donor tissue factors on the clinical outcomes of keratolimbal allograft (KLAL) transplantation. METHODS: In this retrospective chart review of patients who underwent KLAL transplantation, electronic health records were reviewed for relevant patient ocular and surgical history. Donor tissue factors were collected from donor reports. The primary outcome measure was time to epithelialization. Exclusion criteria included prior ocular surface stem cell transplantation, loss to follow-up, missing data from medical records, indication for surgery other than limbal stem cell deficiency, and early removal of KLAL tissue. Regression analysis was performed to compare time to epithelialization and donor tissue factors. Subgroup analysis was performed using the Student t test to evaluate the impact of donor preservation time on time to epithelialization. RESULTS: A total of 154 eyes were identified of which 122 were included for analysis. The mean time to epithelialization was 55 days and median was 35 days. No donor tissue factors were found to affect total time to corneal epithelialization. Subgroup analysis comparing the effect of different total preservation times on time to epithelialization did not reveal any statistically significant associations. CONCLUSIONS: No relationship was found between time to donor tissue preservation and time to epithelialization after KLAL surgery. It appears that limbal stem cells can be safely stored for up to 9 days in corneal storage solution in hypothermic temperatures without clinical consequences.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".