↓ Skip to main content

Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa endophthalmitis in a silicone oil-filled eye treated with piperacillin/tazobactam: report of a case and review of literature

Overview of attention for article published in International Ophthalmology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa endophthalmitis in a silicone oil-filled eye treated with piperacillin/tazobactam: report of a case and review of literature
Published in
International Ophthalmology, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10792-015-0072-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neha Goel, Vishaal Bhambhwani, Basudeb Ghosh

Abstract

The incidence of endophthalmitis after pars plana vitrectomy is low. Silicone oil is a tamponading agent which has anti-microbial activity. Post-operative endophthalmitis following vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade has been rarely reported. We describe the case of a young male who underwent pars plana vitrectomy with silicone oil for retinal detachment with a giant retinal tear. He developed a clinical picture suggestive of endophthalmitis on the first post-operative day, and vitreous culture grew multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. He was treated with intravitreal piperacillin/tazobactam, along with appropriate surgical management. This was followed by resolution of the infection with a remarkable improvement in visual acuity. This is the first case of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa endophthalmitis following pars plana vitrectomy with silicone oil treated successfully with piperacillin/tazobactam.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 18%
Other 2 12%
Researcher 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,227,016
of 22,808,725 outputs
Outputs from International Ophthalmology
#299
of 1,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,510
of 267,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Ophthalmology
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,808,725 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,033 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 267,100 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.