↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Indications and postoperative treatment for Ex-PRESS® insertion in Japanese patients with glaucoma: comparison with standard trabeculectomy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, August 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
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Indications and postoperative treatment for Ex-PRESS® insertion in Japanese patients with glaucoma: comparison with standard trabeculectomy
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s86504
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noriko Kato, Genichiro Takahashi, Koichi Kumegawa, Yoshiaki Kabata, Hiroshi Tsuneoka

Abstract

We investigated indications and early postoperative treatment for Ex-PRESS(®) insertion for glaucoma by comparing postoperative outcomes with those for standard trabeculectomy. Ex-PRESS insertion was performed in 21 eyes and standard trabeculectomy (TLE) in 22 eyes. Mean intraocular pressure (IOP) in the 6 months after surgery, success rate for postoperative IOP decline, postoperative complications, postoperative treatment, filtering blebs, and indications were then retrospectively investigated. Mean postoperative IOP did not differ significantly between the groups at any observation time for 6 months after surgery. Further, it did not differ between either the groups of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and neovascular glaucoma (NTG), or the patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and NTG in the Ex-PRESS group. Comparison of success rates in reduction of postoperative IOP between the groups under the following four survival conditions showed no significant differences: postoperative IOP <30% of the preoperative IOP, complete success (no additional ophthalmic solution), and qualified success (ophthalmic solution required); 5 mmHg ≤ postoperative IOP ≤21 mmHg, complete success (no additional ophthalmic solution), and qualified success (ophthalmic solution required). With regard to postoperative complications and postoperative treatment, the incidence of hyphema was significantly lower in the Ex-PRESS group, but no other significant intergroup differences were seen. The height of the filtering bleb was lower in the Ex-PRESS group. Postoperative outcomes in the Ex-PRESS and TLE groups were comparable. The incidence of hyphema was significantly lower in the Ex-PRESS group. Ex-PRESS insertion appears to be useful in patients with NTG and in those prone to postoperative bleeding. There were no significant intergroup differences in postoperative treatment. Assessment of outcome after Ex-PRESS insertion was difficult in some patients. Postoperative treatment should be developed to suit the specific requirements of Ex-PRESS insertion.

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 %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 25%
Student > Master 3 25%
Other 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 7 58%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Neuroscience 1 8%
Computer Science 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%

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 19 August 2015.
All research outputs
#9,592,173
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#923
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,884
of 238,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#52
of 98 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 238,602 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 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.