MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404909649 · doi:10.1097/iae.0000000000004344

PNEUMATIC RETINOPEXY FOR GIANT RETINAL TEAR–ASSOCIATED RETINAL DETACHMENT

2024· article· en· W4404909649 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRetina · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Macular Surgery
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeRetinal detachmentRetrospective cohort studyRetinalOphthalmologyVisual acuityTearsSurgeryCohortVitrectomyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To report the technique and long-term outcomes of patients with giant retinal tear-associated retinal detachment treated with pneumatic retinopexy (PnR). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study. All patients presenting with giant retinal tear-associated retinal detachment with tears in the superior ten-clock hours who underwent primary PnR were included in this study . RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included in the study. Of these, 61.2% (19 of 31) achieved primary reattachment rate (PARR) with PnR at 3 months and 58.0% (18 of 31) at the final follow-up. Patients included in this study had a median follow-up of 24 months (interquartile range 46.5 months). The absence of retinal tears elsewhere at baseline was associated with a final PARR of 80% (16 of 20) ( P = 0.007). Thirteen eyes required pars plana vitrectomy after a failed PnR. Two eyes required the intraoperative use of perfluorocarbon liquids. No eyes required silicone oil. Visual acuity improved significantly from baseline to the last follow-up. Final anatomical reattachment rate was 100% (31 of 31). CONCLUSION: For selected cases of giant retinal tear associated retinal detachments affecting the superior ten-clock hours, PnR could be a possible treatment option when patients consent to extra visits and the surgeon has substantial expertise. When lacking this extensive experience and comfort with PnR, pars plana vitrectomy remains the treatment that is most likely to result in a primary anatomical reattachment. Although this study provides guidance on PnR technique for giant retinal tear associated retinal detachments, it is essential to note that the reported PARR may be contingent on the expertise of the surgeon/center, and the authors recommend that those new to PnR first gain substantial experience in cases meeting clinical trial criteria.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it