↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Oral mineralocorticoid antagonists for recalcitrant central serous chorioretinopathy

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Oral mineralocorticoid antagonists for recalcitrant central serous chorioretinopathy
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s86778
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric Chin, David Almeida, C. Nathaniel Roybal, Philip Niles, Karen Gehrs, Elliott Sohn, Culver Boldt, Stephen Russell, James Folk

Abstract

To evaluate the effect and tolerance of oral mineralocorticoid antagonists, eplerenone and/or spironolactone, in recalcitrant central serous chorioretinopathy. Retrospective consecutive observational case series. Primary outcome measures included central macular thickness (CMT, μm), macular volume (MV, mm(3)), Snellen visual acuity, and prior treatment failures. Secondary outcomes included duration of treatment, treatment dosage, and systemic side effects. A total of 120 patients with central serous chorioretinopathy were reviewed, of which 29 patients were treated with one or more mineralocorticoid antagonists. The average age of patients was 58.4 years. Sixteen patients (69.6%) were recalcitrant to other interventions prior to treatment with oral mineralocorticoid antagonists, with an average washout period of 15.3 months. The average duration of mineralocorticoid antagonist treatment was 3.9±2.3 months. Twelve patients (52.2%) showed decreased CMT and MV, six patients (26.1%) had increase in both, and five patients (21.7%) had negligible changes. The mean decrease in CMT of all patients was 42.4 μm (range, -136 to 255 μm): 100.7 μm among treatment-naïve patients, and 16.9 μm among recalcitrant patients. The mean decrease in MV of all patients was 0.20 mm(3) (range, -2.33 to 2.90 mm(3)): 0.6 mm(3) among treatment-naïve patients, and 0.0 mm(3) among recalcitrant patients. Median visual acuity at the start of therapy was 20/30 (range, 20/20-20/250), and at final follow-up it was 20/40 (range, 20/20-20/125). Nine patients (39.1%) experienced systemic side effects, of which three patients (13.0%) were unable to continue therapy. Mineralocorticoid antagonist treatment had a positive treatment effect in half of our patients. The decrease in CMT and MV was much less in the recalcitrant group compared to the treatment-naïve group. An improvement in vision was seen only in the treatment-naïve group. Systemic side effects, even at low doses, may limit its usage in some patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 75%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 6 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,048,545
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#506
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,930
of 235,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#16
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 235,310 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.