↓ Skip to main content

Intraocular lens dislocation and tube shunt in the posterior chamber: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ophthalmology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Intraocular lens dislocation and tube shunt in the posterior chamber: a case report
Published in
BMC Ophthalmology, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12886-015-0046-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Javier Moreno-Montañés, Alvaro Velázquez-Villoria, Alfonso L. Sabater, Angel Salinas-Alamán

Abstract

To describe management of a case of intraocular lens (IOL) and capsular bag (CB) dislocation in an eye with an Ahmed glaucoma valve in the posterior chamber. A 75-year-old pseudophakic man with open-angle glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy developed neovascular glaucoma. After two intravitreous injections of bevacizumab and panretinal photocoagulation were administered, the new vessels regressed. However, goniosynechiae were observed over 360° of the angle. An Ahmed glaucoma valve model FP7 was implanted with the tube in the posterior chamber with adequate intraocular pressure control. Nineteen years after cataract surgery, when the IOL-CB complex became dislocated, they were sutured transclerally to the sulcus without Ahmed glaucoma valve modification. After a coughing episode, the vitreous pushed the IOL-CB complex forward and the tube was behind the IOL-CB complex. A 25-gauge posterior vitrectomy was performed, and the tube was returned to in front of the optic of the IOL using a forceps tip through a sclerotomy. This case suggested that management of IOL-CB dislocation can modify glaucoma shunt function. A complete pars plana vitrectomy may be required in order to reposition the dislocated IOL-CB complex in the presence of a posterior chamber drainage tube implant.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 15%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Other 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 30%
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 20 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,280,315
of 22,813,792 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ophthalmology
#2,080
of 2,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,123
of 264,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ophthalmology
#25
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,813,792 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 2,343 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. 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 264,249 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 38 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.