↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Visual outcome and efficacy of conjunctival autograft, harvested from the body of pterygium in pterygium excision

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Visual outcome and efficacy of conjunctival autograft, harvested from the body of pterygium in pterygium excision
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, December 2015
DOI 10.2147/opth.s93580
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vipul Bhandari, Chandan Latha Rao, Sri Ganesh, Sheetal Brar

Abstract

To evaluate the efficacy of conjunctival autograft after the pterygium excision with fibrin adhesive using conjunctiva over the pterygium. This prospective study included 25 eyes of 25 patients with a mean age of 40±10 years, who underwent the pterygium excision with conjunctival autograft derived from the body of the pterygium and attached using fibrin glue. The mean follow-up period was 6 months. On all postoperative visits, changes in uncorrected visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, astigmatism, complications, and the evidence of recurrence were recorded. At the end of mean follow-up, uncorrected visual acuity and corrected distance visual acuity improved by one or two lines in all eyes treated. Mean astigmatism reduced significantly from a preoperative value from 2.308D to 1.248D postoperatively (P<0.026). Minor postoperative complications such as congestion, chemosis, and subconjunctival hemorrhage were seen, which resolved with time. No major sight-threatening or graft-related complications were detected. There was no evidence of recurrence during a follow-up period of 6 months. Self-conjunctival autograft following the pterygium excision appears to be a feasible, safe, and effective alternative method for management of pterygium. It also preserves the superior conjunctiva for future surgeries. However, longer follow-up is required to study the long-term outcomes, especially the incidence of recurrence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

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 %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 8 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 9 45%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 December 2015.
All research outputs
#17,438,425
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,780
of 3,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,019
of 396,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#52
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 3,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 396,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.