↓ Skip to main content

Plasma exchange response in 34 patients with severe optic neuritis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Plasma exchange response in 34 patients with severe optic neuritis
Published in
Journal of Neurology, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00415-016-8073-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Romain Deschamps, Antoine Gueguen, Nathalie Parquet, Samir Saheb, Francoise Driss, Malcie Mesnil, Catherine Vignal, Jennifer Aboab, Raphael Depaz, Olivier Gout

Abstract

Optic neuritis could lead to severe visual impairment despite corticosteroids. Our aim was to evaluate the rate of visual improvement in patients treated with plasma exchange (PLEX) for severe steroid unresponsive optic neuritis and to identify predictive factors of outcome. Thirty-four patients (41 optic nerves damaged) with remaining visual acuity of 0.1 or less despite steroid pulse therapy were treated with PLEX from September 2010 to May 2015. Demographic and clinical neuro-ophthalmic findings, and spectral domain-optical coherence tomography data before PLEX treatment were analyzed. The mean symptom duration before PLEX was 34.6 days (median 28 days; range 6-92 days). After PLEX, the median final visual acuity was 0.8 and in 56 % of cases, final acuity was 0.5 or better. Past history of ipsilateral optic neuritis was associated significantly with poor outcome defined as final acuity less than 0.5. No significant difference in the visual outcome after PLEX was found between multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica. In conclusion, this observational study showed that PLEX as second-line therapy led to a functionally important visual recovery in more than half patients with severe optic neuritis.

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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 8 15%
Other 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 39%
Neuroscience 11 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Psychology 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 13 24%
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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,447,592
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#3,643
of 4,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,346
of 300,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#61
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 300,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.