MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407302626 · doi:10.1159/000544098

Valsalva-Induced Orbital and Subcutaneous Periorbital Emphysema Secondary to Lamina Papyracea Dehiscence: A Case Report

2025· article· en· W4407302626 on OpenAlexaff
Stuti M. Tanya, Merve Kulbay, Femida Kherani, Marc B. Mydlarski

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Ophthalmology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Trauma and Fracture Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDehiscenceLaminaAnatomySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Pneumo-orbit and periorbital subcutaneous emphysema secondary to defects in the sinus wall have been well described in the context of traumatic or surgical sequelae. However, these conditions may rarely occur atraumatically in the setting of an idiopathic or congenital sinus wall dehiscence, with a risk for orbital compartment syndrome and irreversible vision loss. We describe a case of idiopathic lamina papyracea dehiscence with resultant pneumo-orbit and elevated intraocular pressure. Case Presentation: A 28-year-old man experienced a sudden onset of unilateral orbital and subcutaneous periorbital emphysema following Valsalva maneuver. He had unilateral subcutaneous emphysema, crepitus, violaceous discoloration of the lids, and chemosis of the palpebral conjunctiva. Visual acuity was intact, and intraocular pressure was mildly elevated. Imaging showed an idiopathic lamina papyracea dehiscence. The patient was advised of sinus precautions with uneventful spontaneous resolution and no visual sequelae. Conclusion: Lamina papyracea dehiscence predisposes to spontaneous Valsalva-induced orbital or periorbital emphysema with a risk of elevated intraocular pressure, optic neuropathy, and vision loss; prompt recognition and early management can prevent vision-threatening sequelae.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in OphthalmologySame topicFacial Trauma and Fracture ManagementFrench-language works237,207