| Title |
Wide-field laser ophthalmoscopy for imaging of gas-filled eyes after macular hole surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s109900 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shintaro Nakao, Ryoichi Arita, Yuki Sato, Hiroshi Enaida, Akifumi Ueno, Takaaki Matsui, Hani Salehi-Had, Tatsuro Ishibashi, Koh-hei Sonoda |
| Abstract |
Existing ophthalmoscopy methods are unable to obtain clear fundus autofluorescence (FAF) images in gas-filled eyes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the capability of wide-field laser ophthalmoscopy (Optos) in obtaining FAF images in gas-filled eyes for the assessment of macular hole (MH) closure after surgery. This was an interventional case series. Eighteen consecutive patients with unilateral MH underwent vitrectomy with internal limiting membrane peeling and 20% sulfur hexafluoride gas tamponade. FAF images using Optos were recorded preoperatively and postoperatively (days 1, 2, and 7). On postoperative days 1, 2, and 7, FAF images were obtained from 11/18 (61.1%), 9/18 (50.0%), and 17/18 eyes (94.4%), respectively, using Optos. The quality of FAF images using Optos was sufficient to determine MH closure in 9/18 (50.0%) of gas-filled eyes postoperatively. Quantitative analysis of FAF images was helpful in determining complete or partial closure of the MH. FAF imaging using Optos might be a useful adjunct to optical coherence tomography as a supportive method to guide the release from facedown posturing in some cases of MH. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 1 | 20% |
| Other | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 20% |
| Engineering | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,486
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#53
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.