| Title |
Changes in corneal endothelium cell characteristics after cataract surgery with and without use of viscoelastic substances during intraocular lens implantation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s90628 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephan D Schulze, Thomas Bertelmann, Irena Manojlovic, Stefan Bodanowitz, Sebastian Irle, Walter Sekundo |
| Abstract |
To evaluate whether the use of balanced salt solution (BSS) or an ophthalmic viscoelastic device (OVD) during hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) implantation variously impacts corneal endothelial cell characteristics in eyes undergoing uneventful phacoemulsifications. Prospective nonrandomized observational clinical trial. Patients were assigned either to the BSS plus(®) or to the OVD Z-Celcoat™ group depending on the substance used during IOL implantation. Corneal endothelium cell characteristics were obtained before, 1 week, and 6 weeks after surgery. Intraoperative parameters (eg, surgery time, phacoemulsification energy) were recorded. Ninety-seven eyes were assigned to the BSS plus and 86 eyes to the Z-Celcoat group. Preoperative corneal endothelium cell density (ECD) and endothelium cell size were 2,506±310 cells/mm(2)/2,433±261 cells/mm(2) and 406±47 µm(2)/416±50 µm(2) (P=0.107/P=0.09). After 1 and 6 weeks, ECD decreased and endothelium cell size increased significantly in both groups (each P<0.001) without significant differences between both groups (each P>0.05). Irrigation-aspiration suction time (30.3±16.6 versus 36.3±14.5 seconds) and overall surgical time (7.2±1.2 versus 8.0±1.4 minutes) were significantly longer in the OVD Z-Celcoat group (each P<0.001). No complications or serious side effects occurred. Implantation of a hydrophilic acrylic IOL under BSS infusion seems to be a useful and faster alternative in experienced hands without generating higher ECD loss rates. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
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 09 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,803
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,405
of 294,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#53
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 294,815 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 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.