↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Epiretinal membrane and cystoid macular edema as predictive factors of recurrent proliferative vitreoretinopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Epiretinal membrane and cystoid macular edema as predictive factors of recurrent proliferative vitreoretinopathy
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2017
DOI 10.2147/opth.s146681
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kunyong Xu, Eric K Chin, D Wilkin Parke, David RP Almeida

Abstract

Proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PVR) is the most common cause of recurrent retinal detachment (RD). We sought to determine the predictive factors of recurrent PVR formation and the need for additional vitreoretinal surgical intervention after uncomplicated primary RD repair. This is a retrospective single-center case-control study of consecutive patients with PVR formation after uncomplicated RD repair. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with recurrent PVR formation. Thirty-seven eyes (37 patients) who had recurrent RD secondary to PVR formation were included. Among those, 27 eyes needed one additional surgery, whereas the remainder 10 eyes required two or more additional surgeries. In the univariate analysis, patients who had cystoid macular edema (CME) after the second surgery were 8.33 times (crude odds ratio [COR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-56.67, p=0.0302) more likely to have recurrent PVR formation compared to those who did not have CME after the second surgery. Similarly, those who had epiretinal membrane (ERM) after the second surgery were 8.00 times (COR, 95% CI: 1.43-44.92, p=0.0182) more likely to have recurrent PVR formation compared to those who did not have ERM after the second surgery. In the multivariate analysis, patients who had ERM after the second surgery were 8.20 times (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 95% CI: 1.08-62.40, p=0.0422) more likely to develop recurrent PVR compared to those who did not have ERM after the second surgery, when adjusted for age, sex, and CME after the second surgery. ERM and CME are potential predictive factors for recurrent PVR formation after uncomplicated primary RD repair. Early recognition and treatment of ERM and CME may be critical to prevent subsequent PVR formation and improve visual outcomes.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 22%
Student > Postgraduate 2 22%
Researcher 2 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Unspecified 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 56%
Unspecified 1 11%
Engineering 1 11%
Unknown 2 22%
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 21 October 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,475
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,787
of 331,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#23
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 331,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.