| Title |
Intravitreal ranibizumab as a primary or a combined treatment for severe retinopathy of prematurity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s90979 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Odalis Arámbulo, Gabriel Dib, Juan Iturralde, Fahir Duran, Miguel Brito, João B Fortes Filho |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to assess the outcomes of severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in zone I or posterior zone II treated with intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) as monotherapy or combined treatment with laser photocoagulation. This is a retrospective study analyzing clinical records of the included patients. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 included patients who received only IVR treatment; and group 2 was subdivided into group 2A - including patients with IVR as initial treatment and complementary laser photocoagulation if retinal neovascularization or plus disease did not regress, and group 2B - including patients with initial laser photocoagulation and IVR as rescue therapy. Favorable outcomes were regression of the retinal neovascularization and plus disease, meaning control of the disease. Unfavorable outcomes were progression to stages 4 and 5 of ROP. Fifty-seven eyes were included in the study. Mean birth weight and gestational age were 1,281±254 g and 29.5±2.1 weeks, respectively. Group 1 comprised of 16 eyes, with favorable outcomes in 14 eyes (87.5%). Group 2 comprised of 41 eyes, with favorable outcomes in 29 eyes (70.7%), in a mean follow-up period of 12.8 months. IVR was effective to treat severe cases of ROP as a primary or a combined treatment. Forty-three of the 57 treated eyes (75.4%) achieved regression of ROP and favorable outcomes. |
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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 30% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 15% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 55% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
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 01 November 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
#196,264
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.