↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Reassessment of pneumatic retinopexy for primary treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Reassessment of pneumatic retinopexy for primary treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s91486
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Mimouni, Eyal Cohen, Amir Zerach, Adiel Barak

Abstract

Pneumatic retinopexy (PR) remains a popular technique for the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). To evaluate the single operation and final success rate of PR for primary treatment of RRD and to determine factors associated with anatomical and visual outcomes. This retrospective case review study analyzed the data of patients who underwent PR for primary treatment of RRD. Patients with a follow-up period of <2 months were excluded. Single operation success was defined as successful retinal reattachment following a single PR throughout 2 months of follow-up. Eighty-four eyes met the inclusion criteria. Single operation success was achieved in 50 eyes (59.5%), while 82 obtained anatomical success at the final follow-up visit (97.6%). An average of 0.702±1.095 additional retinal detachment operations was necessary to achieve final anatomical success in the entire cohort (n=84) and 1.4±1.3 in the single operation failure group (n=34). Both groups (single operation success vs failure) did not differ significantly in any of the preoperative variables. Multivariate analysis of pseudophakic patients (n=22) revealed that 52.65% of the variation in single operation outcome was explained by the number of clock-hours detached (partial R (2)=43.76%, P=0.001). The final best-corrected visual acuity was significantly better in the single operation success group (logarithm of minimum angle [logMAR] 0.229±0.249 vs logMAR 0.747±0.567, P<0.001). Careful patient selection is warranted before performing PR in RRD, particularly in pseudophakic patients with large detachments. Ultimately 60% of the cases will attach after the procedure with the rest requiring on average 1.4 additional procedures to achieve final anatomical success.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 7%
Unknown 13 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,490,242
of 12,488,808 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#385
of 1,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,631
of 275,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#21
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,488,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 74% 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 275,379 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 63% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.