↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Long-term (60-month) results for the implantable miniature telescope: efficacy and safety outcomes stratified by age in patients with end-stage age-related macular degeneration

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Long-term (60-month) results for the implantable miniature telescope: efficacy and safety outcomes stratified by age in patients with end-stage age-related macular degeneration
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s86208
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Boyer, K Bailey Freund, Carl Regillo, Marc H Levy, Sumit Garg

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term results of an implantable miniature telescope (IMT) in patients with bilateral, end-stage, age-related macular degeneration (AMD). A prospective, open-label, multicenter clinical trial with fellow eye controls enrolled 217 patients (mean age 76 years) with AMD and moderate-to-profound bilateral central visual acuity loss (20/80-20/800) resulting from untreatable geographic atrophy, disciform scars, or both. A subgroup analysis was performed with stratification for age (patient age 65 to <75 years [group 1; n=70] and patient age ≥75 years [group 2; n=127]), with a comparative evaluation of change in best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), quality of life, ocular complications from surgery, adverse events, and endothelial cell density (ECD). Follow-up in an extension study was 60 months. Data were available for 22, 38, and 31 patients in group 1 and 42, 46, and 32 patients in group 2 at 36, 48, and 60 months, respectively. Mean BCDVA improvement from baseline to 60 months was 2.41±2.69 lines in all patients (n=76), with 2.64±2.55 lines in group 1 and 2.09±2.88 lines in group 2. Quality of life scores were significantly higher in group 1. The most common significant surgery-related ocular complications in group 1 were iritis >30 days after surgery (7/70; 10%) and persistent corneal edema (3/70; 4.3%); and in group 2 were a decrease in BCDVA in the implanted eye or IMT removal (10/127 each; 7.9%), corneal edema >30 days after surgery (9/127; 7.1%), and persistent corneal edema (6/127; 4.7%). Significant adverse events included four corneal transplants, comprising two (2.9%) in group 1 and two (1.6%) in group 2. At 60 months, one patient in group 1 (3.2%) and three patients in group 2 (9.4%) had lost ≥2 lines of vision. The IMT was removed in one (1.4%) and ten (7.9%) patients in group 1 and group 2, respectively. Mean ECD loss was 20% at 3 months. Chronic loss was 3% per year. ECD loss was less in group 1 than in group 2 (35% versus 40%, respectively) at 60 months. Long-term results show substantial retention of improvement in BDCVA. Chronic ECD loss was consistent with that reported for conventional intraocular lenses. The IMT performed as well in group 1 (the younger group) as it did in group 2 through month 60. Younger patients retained more vision than their older counterparts and had fewer adverse events. Although not a specified outcome for this study, patients younger than 65 years also fared better than those in group 2 and retained more vision with fewer adverse events through month 60.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 29%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Professor 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 14 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,253,253
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#80
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,366
of 281,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#3
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 281,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.