↓ Skip to main content

Peripapillary gamma zone pit as dehiscence between Elschnig´s border tissue and Bruch´s membrane with herniation and defect of the retinal nerve fiber layer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ophthalmology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Peripapillary gamma zone pit as dehiscence between Elschnig´s border tissue and Bruch´s membrane with herniation and defect of the retinal nerve fiber layer
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12886-016-0322-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xinxin Hu, Yi Dai, Jost Jonas, Xinghuai Sun

Abstract

The parapapillary gamma zone has recently been defined as the parapapillary region free of Bruch's membrane. Although it has been reported the presence of defects in peripapillary gamma zone, hitherto undescribed is the herniation of the retinal nerve fiver layer tissue into the peripapillary gamma zone defect with the resulting localized defects in the retinal nerve fiber layer. Ophthalmoscopy in a 36-year-old man revealed a localized defect of the retinal nerve fiber layer associated with a yellowish-gray lesion at the inferior temporal outer margin of a peripapillary gamma zone. Enhanced depth imaging of spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) showed a dehiscence at the connecting point between the central end of Bruch's membrane and the peripheral end of the border tissue of Elschnig and Jacoby. Retinal nerve fiber layer tissue was herniated through this defect into a cavitation located in the suprachoroidal space and the space above the cerebrospinal fluid space. At a 2-year follow-up examination, the defect and retinal nerve fiber layer defect appeared unchanged. We present a peripapillary gamma zone pit originating as a dehiscence between Elschnig's border tissue and Bruch's membrane and associated with a herniation and defect of the retinal nerve fiber layer and with a suprachoroidal cavitation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 67%
Computer Science 1 11%
Unknown 2 22%
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 16 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,337,210
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#2,096
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#311,454
of 355,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#33
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 355,875 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.