| Title |
Two or more dexamethasone intravitreal implants in treatment-naïve patients with macular edema due to retinal vein occlusion: subgroup analysis of a retrospective chart review study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Ophthalmology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12886-015-0106-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pravin U. Dugel, Antonio Capone, Michael A. Singer, Richard F. Dreyer, David G. Dodwell, Daniel B. Roth, Rui Shi, John G. Walt, Lanita C. Scott, David A. Hollander, for the SHASTA Study Group |
| Abstract |
Dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEX implant) is a biodegradable, sustained-release implant that releases dexamethasone for up to 6 months. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of DEX implant in the treatment of macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO) in treatment-naïve patients. A multicenter, retrospective, open-label chart review study investigated the efficacy and safety of DEX implant treatment in 289 patients with macular edema secondary to branch or central RVO (BRVO, CRVO) who received ≥2 treatments with DEX implant in the study eye. Concomitant adjunctive RVO treatments were permitted. Data collected from the time of the first implant (baseline) to 3-6 months after the last implant included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central retinal thickness measured with optical coherence tomography. In this subgroup analysis, we evaluated outcomes in patients who had received no previous treatment for RVO complications. Thirty-nine patients were treatment-naïve at the time of their first DEX implant (18 BRVO, 21 CRVO). Before the initial DEX implant, the mean duration of macular edema in treatment-naïve patients was 4.9 months, mean central retinal thickness was 550 μm, and mean Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study BCVA was 8.5 lines (20/125 Snellen). Treatment-naïve patients received a mean of 2.9 implants, either as monotherapy (n = 12) or with adjunctive RVO treatments (n = 27). The mean interval between implants was 177 days. After the first through sixth implants, mean changes from baseline BCVA ranged from +3.0 - +8.0 lines, and mean decreases from baseline central retinal thickness ranged from 241-459 μm. BCVA improved in both BRVO and CRVO and in both phakic and pseudophakic eyes. Overall, 83.8 % of treatment-naïve patients gained ≥2 lines in BCVA, 70.3 % gained ≥3 lines in BCVA, and 56.4 % achieved central retinal thickness ≤250 μm. The most common adverse event was increased intraocular pressure. Fifteen treatment-naïve patients had intraocular pressure ≥25 mm Hg; none required laser or incisional glaucoma surgery. Treatment with 2 or more DEX implants had a favorable safety profile and improved visual acuity and anatomic outcomes when used, either alone or with adjunctive RVO therapy, as initial treatment for RVO-associated macular edema. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411696 , registered on August 5, 2011. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 36% |
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 05 September 2015.
All research outputs
#17,772,019
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#1,083
of 2,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,040
of 267,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#20
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,347 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. 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 267,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.