↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Anesthetic keratopathy presenting as bilateral Mooren-like ulcers

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Anesthetic keratopathy presenting as bilateral Mooren-like ulcers
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2012
DOI 10.2147/opth.s36611
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hamid Khakshoor, Majid Moshirfar, Rachel G Simpson, Hamid Gharaee, Amir H Vejdani, Steven M Christiansen, Jason N Edmonds, Nicholas L Behunin

Abstract

This observational case report describes the development of bilateral Mooren-like ulcers in a patient with anesthetic keratopathy. A 42-year-old man with a recent history of minor eye trauma and pain self-treated with tetracaine eye drops presented with complaints of acutely worsening vision and severe pain bilaterally. His visual acuity at presentation was limited to hand motion. Slit-lamp examination revealed bilateral epithelial defects at the center of the cornea, and an area of stromal infiltration and thinning with an undermining leading edge resembling a Mooren's ulcer in both eyes. Corneal haze and hypopyon were visible. Anesthetic use was halted immediately and the patient was started on prednisolone and mycophenolate mofetil (Cellcept(®)), after which visual acuity gradually improved and pain decreased. Despite improvement of symptoms, residual epithelial defects remained, and the patient was ultimately treated with keratoplasty for recovery of vision. We suggest that anesthetic keratopathy should be included in the differential diagnosis for any patient presenting with ring-shaped stromal infiltrates or nonhealing epithelial defects.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 19%
Other 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Professor 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 50%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 March 2020.
All research outputs
#7,856,238
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#671
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,796
of 191,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#9
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
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 191,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.