↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Progressive loss of vision caused by asymptomatic pituitary macroadenoma: role of OCT

Overview of attention for article published in International Medical Case Reports Journal, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Progressive loss of vision caused by asymptomatic pituitary macroadenoma: role of OCT
Published in
International Medical Case Reports Journal, September 2016
DOI 10.2147/imcrj.s113339
Pubmed ID
Authors

Víctor Manuel Asensio-Sánchez, Javier Foncubierta

Abstract

Most pituitary adenomas are clinically inactive. In patients with long-standing compression of the optic chiasm, ganglion cells may undergo axonal degeneration. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) is able to identify retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and ganglion cell loss in the retina. We present a case in which SD-OCT was used to diagnose an asymptomatic pituitary macroadenoma. A 48-year-old female presented with progressive vision loss in both eyes. SD-OCT identified atrophy of the ganglion cell and nerve layers, with preservation of outer layers bilaterally. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain showed a pituitary macroadenoma. The pathological diagnosis was nonfunctioning adenoma. As macroadenomas enlarge, they can induce uncrossed axon loss, resulting in nasal field defects and reduced visual acuity. In these cases, there is atrophy of the nasal and temporal portions of the optic disc, thus occupying a horizontal band across the disc. SD-OCT is able to identify RNFL loss in eyes with band atrophy of the optic nerve, which correlates with visual field defects found in perimetry. SD-OCT is a useful tool to assess the structural and functional damage of ganglion cells. In our case the SD-OCT demonstrated a symmetrical loss of the RNFL and the ganglion cell layer in both eyes, indicating important optic nerve damage.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 September 2016.
All research outputs
#18,471,305
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from International Medical Case Reports Journal
#236
of 375 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,245
of 337,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Medical Case Reports Journal
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 375 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 337,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.