| Title |
Pars plana vitrectomy combined with internal limiting membrane peeling for recurrent macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion after antivascular endothelial growth factor treatments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s85751 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yukari Shirakata, Kouki Fukuda, Tomoyoshi Fujita, Yuki Nakano, Hiroyuki Nomoto, Hidetaka Yamaji, Fumio Shiraga, Akitaka Tsujikawa |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the anatomic and functional outcomes of pars plana vitrectomy combined with internal limiting membrane peeling for recurrent macular edema (ME) due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) after intravitreal injections of antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents. Twenty-four eyes of 24 patients with treatment-naive ME from BRVO were treated with intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents. Recurred ME was treated with pars plana vitrectomy combined with internal limiting membrane peeling. After the surgery, ME was significantly reduced at 1 month (P=0.031) and the reduction increased with time (P=0.007 at the final visit). With the reduction in ME, treated eyes showed a slow improvement in visual acuity (VA). At the final visit, improvement in VA was statistically significant compared with baseline (P=0.048). The initial presence of cystoid spaces, serous retinal detachment, or subretinal hemorrhage under the fovea, as well as retinal perfusion status, showed no association with VA improvement. However, the presence of epiretinal membrane showed a significant association with the visual recovery. Although eyes without epiretinal membrane showed visual improvement (-0.10±0.32 in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]), eyes with epiretinal membrane showed greater visual improvement (-0.38±0.12 in logMAR, P=0.012). For recurrent ME due to BRVO after anti-VEGF treatment, particularly when accompanied by epiretinal membrane, pars plana vitrectomy combined with internal limiting membrane peeling might be a possible treatment option. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 20% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 70% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 1 | 10% |
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 29 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,803
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#247,077
of 406,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#41
of 61 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 406,425 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 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.