↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Epidemiological evaluation of YAG capsulotomy incidence for posterior capsule opacification in various intraocular lenses in Japanese eyes

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Epidemiological evaluation of YAG capsulotomy incidence for posterior capsule opacification in various intraocular lenses in Japanese eyes
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, September 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s89966
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yutaro Nishi, Tomohiro Ikeda, Kayo Nishi, Osamu Mimura

Abstract

We investigated the yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG) capsulotomy rates in various intraocular lenses (IOLs). We retrospectively analyzed 23,440 eyes implanted with either MA60BM, MA60AC, VA-60BB, CeeOnEdge, Clariflex, Technis Z9002, SI-40NB, or UV26T IOLs. We calculated the YAG capsulotomy rates at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years post lens implantation. YAG capsulotomy rates at 3 years postimplantation for the eight groups of IOLs were, respectively, 3.7%, 3.9%, 23.7%, 3.4%, 4.5%, 4.7%, 10.4%, and 21.0%. YAG capsulotomy rates at 10 years postimplantation for the MA60BM and SI-40NB IOLs were, respectively, 9.1% and 15% (P<0.05). The average YAG rates for all sharp-edged and round-edged IOLs at 5 years postimplantation were, respectively, 5.2%±0.7% and 25.6%±9.0% (P<0.05). In all studied IOLs, posterior capsule opacification prevention seemed to be associated with the posterior optic sharp-edge design. Round-edged silicone IOLs may also retard posterior capsule opacification formation, though not as much as sharp-edged IOLs. As the follow-up period progressed, round-edged silicone IOLs showed significantly higher YAG rates than sharp-edged IOLs.

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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Student > Master 2 15%
Other 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 54%
Unspecified 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Chemical Engineering 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%

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 02 September 2015.
All research outputs
#9,995,740
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,037
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,437
of 239,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#60
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 239,138 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.