| Title |
Intravitreal aflibercept for the treatment of choroidal neovascularization associated with pathologic myopia: a pilot study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s117791 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrii R Korol, Oleg S Zadorozhnyy, Volodymyr O Naumenko, Taras B Kustryn, Nataliya V Pasyechnikova |
| Abstract |
To determine the efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept injections for the treatment of patients with choroidal neovascularization (CNV) associated with pathologic myopia. In this uncontrolled, prospective cohort study, 31 eyes of 30 consecutive patients affected by CNV associated with pathologic myopia were treated with intravitreal aflibercept (2 mg) as needed following two initial monthly doses and observed over a 12-month follow-up period. The primary endpoint was change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at month 12, while central retinal thickness (CRT) on optical coherence tomography (OCT), neovascularization activity on fluorescein angiography, the number of aflibercept injections administered, and safety were examined as secondary endpoints. Patients received a mean of 2.6 intravitreal aflibercept injections over the 12-month study period. Compared with baseline, BCVA improved significantly at all time points (P<0.05). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) decimal BCVA was 0.2 (0.1) at baseline and 0.35 (0.16) at month 12. The greatest improvement in BCVA was seen within the first 2 months (P=0.01). Mean (SD) CRT on OCT decreased from 285 (62) µm at baseline to 227 (42) µm (P=0.01) at month 12. There was a continuous decrease in mean CRT on OCT over time. No cases of endophthalmitis, uveitis, stroke, or retinal detachment were noted. No patient demonstrated an intraocular pressure >20 mmHg during any study visit. The 12-month results of intravitreal aflibercept for myopic CNV using an as-needed regimen were positive, showing benefits in visual and anatomic outcomes and an acceptable tolerability profile. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 53% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 September 2017.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#820
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,792
of 317,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#17
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 317,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.