↓ Skip to main content

Macular edema with serous retinal detachment post-phacoemulsification followed by spectral domain optical coherence tomography: a report of two cases

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 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.
Title
Macular edema with serous retinal detachment post-phacoemulsification followed by spectral domain optical coherence tomography: a report of two cases
Published in
BMC Research Notes, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1639-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hui Xiao, Xing Liu, Xinxing Guo

Abstract

Macular edema and detachment at the first day after an uneventful cataract surgery is very rare, and has been reported previously with the use of high concentrations of intra-cameral cefuroxime. However, we hereby reported two cases of macular edema with extensive serous retinal detachment the first day after an uneventful phacoemulsification with intra-cameral injection of a standard dose of cefuroxime during the procedure. A 68-year-old female and a 63-year-old male without any special history both underwent an uneventful phacoemulsification surgery and 1 mg/0.1 ml of cefuroxime solution was injected into the anterior chamber at the end of the procedure. Macular edema with extensive serous retinal detachment around macula and optic disc area were observed the first day after surgery. Without surgical intervention, a quick recovery of the macular edema and retinal detachment was observed by spectral domain optical coherence tomography 1 week later in both cases. We presume that the retina injury in the two cases may be attributed to cefuroxime toxicity even under a use of a standard dose. But the retinal damages are restorable and routine anti-inflammatory treatment is enough.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 25%
Student > Master 1 25%
Researcher 1 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 50%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 25%
Unspecified 1 25%

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 06 November 2015.
All research outputs
#5,575,158
of 6,535,212 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,447
of 1,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,321
of 210,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#137
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,535,212 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 1,797 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. 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 210,012 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 188 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.