↓ Skip to main content

Treatment of Acanthamoeba neurotrophic corneal ulcer with topical matrix therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Treatment of Acanthamoeba neurotrophic corneal ulcer with topical matrix therapy
Published in
Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12348-015-0048-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Mateo, Beatriz Abadía, Pilar Calvo, Enrique Minguez, Luis Pablo, José Manuel Benitez del Castillo

Abstract

This study was done to evaluate the visual and anatomical outcomes of topical regenerating agents as a novel therapy for neutrophic corneal ulcer (NCU) secondary to acanthamoeba infection. A 20-year-old woman with a history of contact lens wear was referred to our hospital for keratitis after responding poorly to conventional treatment. In vivo confocal microscopy images suggested acanthamoeba keratitis with double-walled cysts in the anterior corneal stroma. Acanthamoeba infection was confirmed by laboratory findings. She was started on 0.1 % propamidine and 0.02 % chlorhexidine drops every hour. The antibiotic and antifungal drops were stopped when bacterial and fungal cultures proved negative. A central neurotrophic corneal ulcers (NCU) appeared, and despite treatment with artificial tears, bandage contact lens, and autologous serum, the ulcer worsened and she was treated with topical CACICOL20 (1 drop every 2 days) for 8 weeks. The corneal defect was completely repaired in 3 weeks. The treatment was well tolerated, and no local or systemic side effects were noted. Visual acuity remained 20/400. Two months later, the defect was still closed and the patient continued with 0.1 % propamidine and 0.02 % chlorhexidine drops, bandage contact lens, artificial tears, and autologous serum. Topical regenerating agents interact with components of the extracellular matrix, binding matrix proteins and protecting them from proteolysis, restoring the matrix environment, and improving tissue healing. In this case, CALCICOL20 was effective for vision stabilization, wound healing, and was well tolerated for NCU secondary to acanthamoeba infection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 4%
Egypt 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 September 2015.
All research outputs
#13,440,185
of 22,813,792 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection
#55
of 185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,253
of 264,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,813,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 185 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 264,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them