| Title |
Efficacy of vitrectomy and epiretinal membrane peeling in eyes with dry age-related macular degeneration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s94948 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John O Mason, Shyam A Patel |
| Abstract |
To study the efficacy of epiretinal membrane (ERM) peeling in eyes with dry age-related macular degeneration (AMD). We retrospectively analyzed patient charts on 17 eyes (16 patients) that underwent ERM peeling with a concurrent diagnosis of dry AMD. Eyes with concurrent dry AMD and with a good preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (better than or equal to 20/50) had a statistically significant mean BCVA improvement at 6 months after ERM peeling. There was a statistical increase in mean BCVA from 20/95 to 20/56 in dry AMD eyes, and no eyes showed worsening in BCVA at 6 months or at most recent follow-up. Five/seventeen (29.4%) eyes had cataract formation or progression. There were no other complications, reoperations, or reoccurrences. ERM peeling in eyes with dry AMD may show significant improvement, especially in eyes with good preoperative BCVA. The procedure is relatively safe with low complications and reoccurrences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 29% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 14% |
| Professor | 1 | 14% |
| Researcher | 1 | 14% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 86% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 14% |
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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,475
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,265
of 286,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#55
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 286,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.