↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

A case of WAGR syndrome in association with developmental glaucoma requiring bilateral Baerveldt glaucoma implants and subsequent tube repositioning

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
A case of WAGR syndrome in association with developmental glaucoma requiring bilateral Baerveldt glaucoma implants and subsequent tube repositioning
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s80444
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tadamichi Akagi, Munemitsu Yoshikawa, Hideo Nakanishi, Nagahisa Yoshimura

Abstract

Glaucoma drainage device implantation is efficacious for the treatment of pediatric glaucoma patients when multiple angle surgeries fail. However, tube touching of the corneal endothelium is one of the major postoperative complications to deal with. A 15-month-old male patient with Wilms' tumor, aniridia, genitourinary anomalies, and mental retardation (WAGR) syndrome was diagnosed with bilateral developmental glaucoma. He underwent Baerveldt glaucoma implant (BGI) surgeries in both eyes after multiple failed trabeculotomies. The tube in his right eye was touching the cornea 15 months after BGI surgery. To avoid corneal endothelium damage, BGI tube repositioning with scleral fixation was performed without serious complications. The bilateral BGI surgeries achieved successful intraocular pressure reduction for over 2 years and tube repositioning with scleral fixation of BGI tube was successful for BGI tube malposition. Although careful attention to intraocular pressure and tube malposition is essential after glaucoma drainage device implantation, especially in pediatric cases, BGI surgery is effective in the management of developmental glaucoma following unsuccessful angle surgeries.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 8%
Unknown 11 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 25%
Student > Master 3 25%
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 50%
Psychology 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Computer Science 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%

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 26 August 2015.
All research outputs
#9,592,169
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#918
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,261
of 200,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#41
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,597 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 200,205 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.