Chasing the objective upper eyelid symmetry formula; R2, RMSE, POC, MAE, and MSE.

PURPOSE: Investigate the most appropriate mathematical formula to objectively express upper eyelid contour symmetry. METHODS: 62 eyes of 31 patients were included in the study. The upper eyelid contour symmetry of the patients was classified subjectively (independent of MRD1) as poor, acceptable, and good by three oculoplastic specialists (senior, expert, and junior surgeon). Bézier curves of the upper lid contour were drawn with ImageJ software (NIH, Bethesda, MA, USA). Using the algorithms created by Author SKC in Spyder (Python 3.7.9.), the symmetry of the Bézier curves of the left eyelids were obtained according to the y-axis, and the mid-pupils of both eyes were superimposed. The lower curve moved vertically to the equal height of the other curve to equalize MRD1's. R2 (Coefficient of determination), RMSE (Root-mean-square error), MSE (Mean squared error), POC (Percentage of co-efficiency), and MAE (Mean absolute error) were calculated. We evaluated the correlation between these objective formulas and the subjective grading of three surgeons using Spearman's rho (ρ). RESULTS: The correlation coefficient of RMSE and MSE were the same for all surgeons grading. There was a strong correlation between the senior surgeon's subjective scoring (N; poor = 8, acceptable = 16, good = 8) and R2, RMSE, POC, MAE (ρ = 0.643, p < 0.001, ρ = -0.607, p < 0.001, ρ = 0.562, p < 0.001, ρ = -0.517, p < 0.001, respectively). We found a strong relationship between the expert surgeon's subjective scoring (N; poor = 9, acceptable = 13, good:10) and R2 (ρ = 0.611, p < 0.001), RMSE (ρ = -0.549, p < 0.001), POC (ρ = 0.511, p < 0.001), and MAE (ρ = -0.450, p < 0.05). We found a strong correlation between junior surgeon's subjective scoring (N; poor = 6, acceptable = 18, good = 8) and R2, RMSE, and POC (ρ: -0.517, p < 0.001; ρ: -0.470, p < 0.001; ρ: 0.521, p < 0.001; respectively) and moderate correlation between MAE (ρ:-0.394, p < 0.05). The highest correlation is observed with R2. CONCLUSIONS: RMSE, MSE, POC, MAE, and especially R2, may quantitatively express upper eyelid contour symmetry, comparable with the oculoplastic surgeon. The highest correlation was observed between the senior surgeon and R2, and decreases with the experience of the surgeon.

The current alternative for ocular surface and anophthalmic socket reconstruction, cryopreserved umbilical amniotic membrane (cUAM).

PURPOSE: This report presents the results of using cryopreserved umbilical amniotic membrane (cUAM) as an alternative mucosal graft for ocular surface reconstruction in cases of anophthalmic socket contracture (ASC), cicatricial entropion (CE), and conjunctival-scleral defects. METHODS: The study included patients who underwent non-commercial implantation of cUAM grafts (prepared by corneal banking methods) for ASC, CE, conjunctival defect, and scleral melting. The main success criteria for this study were the comfortable fitting of the ocular prosthesis in ASC patients, the natural eyelid position in CE patients, and the degree of conjunctivalisation in melting patients. RESULTS: cUAM transplantation was performed in 2 patients who could not use a prosthetic eye due to conjunctival contracture, 2 patients with CE, and 1 patient with conjunctival defect and 1 patient with conjunctival-scleral melting. The primary outcome was achieved in 83.3% (5/6) of patients. In one patient with CE, partial healing was achieved due to the persistence of CE in the medial upper eyelid. CONCLUSIONS: cUAM is a viable alternative to mucosal grafting for reconstructing the bulbar and palpebral conjunctival surface, fornix, and orbit, with reduced donor morbidity and shorter surgical time. Its regenerative ability allows for tissue defect healing and improves cosmetic appearance through epithelialization within weeks.