| Title |
Diabetic papillopathy with macular edema treated with intravitreal ranibizumab
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s55076 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Moosang Kim, Jang-Hun Lee, Seung-Jun Lee |
| Abstract |
We report a case of diabetic papillopathy that demonstrated a resolution of optic disk swelling and rapid visual recovery when intravitreal ranibizumab was administered. A 51-year-old male presented with acute painless visual loss in his right eye. His vision was 20/320 in the right eye and 20/50 in the left eye. Fundus examination of the right eye showed nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy with macular edema and a swollen optic disk. Fluorescein angiography showed dye leakage from the right optic disk. Optical coherent tomography revealed a significant increase in retinal nerve fiber-layer thickness. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain was normal. The patient received a single intravitreal ranibizumab (0.5 mg) injection. Two weeks following injection, there was marked regression of the disk swelling and improvement of macular edema, with vision improving to 20/100. Three months following injection, there was complete resolution of the optic disk swelling. No further treatment was required. |
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 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 | 6 | 38% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 38% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
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 27 November 2013.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,735
of 226,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#33
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 226,635 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 65 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.