↓ Skip to main content

Optical Coherence Tomography and Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Findings After Optic Neuritis in Multiple Sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, December 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Optical Coherence Tomography and Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Findings After Optic Neuritis in Multiple Sclerosis
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, December 2020
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2020.618879
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olwen C. Murphy, Grigorios Kalaitzidis, Eleni Vasileiou, Angeliki G. Filippatou, Jeffrey Lambe, Henrik Ehrhardt, Nicole Pellegrini, Elias S. Sotirchos, Nicholas J. Luciano, Yihao Liu, Kathryn C. Fitzgerald, Jerry L. Prince, Peter A. Calabresi, Shiv Saidha

Abstract

Background: In people with multiple sclerosis (MS), optic neuritis (ON) results in inner retinal layer thinning, and reduced density of the retinal microvasculature. Objective: To compare inter-eye differences (IEDs) in macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT angiography (OCTA) measures in MS patients with a history of unilateral ON (MS ON) vs. MS patients with no history of ON (MS non-ON), and to assess how these measures correlate with visual function outcomes after ON. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, people with MS underwent OCT and OCTA. Superficial vascular plexus (SVP) density of each eye was quantified using a deep neural network. IEDs were calculated with respect to the ON eye in MS ON patients, and with respect to the right eye in MS non-ON patients. Statistical analyses used mixed-effect regression models accounting for intra-subject correlations. Results: We included 43 MS ON patients (with 92 discrete OCT/OCTA visits) and 14 MS non-ON patients (with 24 OCT/OCTA visits). Across the cohorts, mean IED in SVP density was -2.69% (SD 3.23) in MS ON patients, as compared to 0.17% (SD 2.39) in MS non-ON patients (p = 0.002). When the MS ON patients were further stratified according to time from ON and compared to MS non-ON patients with multiple cross-sectional analyses, we identified that IED in SVP density was significantly increased in MS ON patients at 1-3 years (p = < 0.001) and >3 years post-ON (p < 0.001), but not at <3 months (p = 0.21) or 3-12 months post-ON (p = 0.07), while IED in ganglion cell + inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) thickness was significantly increased in MS ON patients at all time points post-ON (p ≦ 0.01 for all). IED in SVP density and IED in GCIPL thickness demonstrated significant relationships with IEDs in 100% contrast, 2.5% contrast, and 1.25% contrast letter acuity in MS ON patients (p < 0.001 for all). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that increased IED in SVP density can be detected after ON in MS using OCTA, and detectable changes in SVP density after ON may occur after changes in GCIPL thickness. IED in SVP density and IED in GCIPL thickness correlate well with visual function outcomes in MS ON patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Other 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 12 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 24%
Engineering 3 10%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 15 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 25 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,965,887
of 23,269,984 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#938
of 12,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,733
of 506,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#87
of 589 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,269,984 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 506,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 589 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.