↓ Skip to main content

INTRAVITREAL OCRIPLASMIN IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

Overview of attention for article published in Retina, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
INTRAVITREAL OCRIPLASMIN IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
Published in
Retina, January 2018
DOI 10.1097/iae.0000000000001505
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To investigate predictors of success, visual outcomes, and complications of intravitreal ocriplasmin for the treatment of symptomatic vitreomacular adhesion in a clinical care setting. Retrospective chart review of 49 consecutive eyes of 47 patients who received intravitreal ocriplasmin. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography scans were examined for vitreomacular traction (VMT) release, full-thickness macular hole (FTMH) closure, and other changes in retinal anatomy. Pharmacologic VMT release occurred in 41% of eyes; positive predictors included age ≤75 years (P = 0.001), phakic status (P = 0.016), VMT width ≤750 μm (P = 0.001), and absence of retinal comorbidities (P = 0.035). Pharmacologic FTMH closure occurred in 25% of cases; positive predictors included successful VMT release (P = 0.042), better preinjection best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.036), and smaller FTMH aperture width (P = 0.033). Eyes that achieved VMT release and did not undergo surgery attained significant improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (P = 0.015). Complications included subfoveal lucency (33%), ellipsoid zone disruption (33%), and FTMH base enlargement (75%). Only FTMH base enlargement resulted in worse visual outcomes (P = 0.024). Subgroup analysis of 14 eyes with ideal characteristics (all positive predictors listed above) yielded a 93% VMT release rate. Proper case selection may facilitate successful pharmacologic vitreolysis with ocriplasmin, improve visual outcomes, and minimize potential complications.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 25%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 44%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Unknown 7 44%
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 17 December 2018.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Retina
#2,481
of 3,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#343,453
of 449,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Retina
#40
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,719 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 449,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 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.