↓ Skip to main content

Successful management of ivermectin-induced blindness in an African lion (Panthera leo) by intravenous administration of a lipid emulsion

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Successful management of ivermectin-induced blindness in an African lion (Panthera leo) by intravenous administration of a lipid emulsion
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0603-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muhammad Saqib, Ghazanfar Abbas, Mudassar Niaz Mughal

Abstract

Ivermectin is widely used in veterinary practice for the treatment of ecto- and endo-parasites. In wildlife, an extra-label use this parasiticide is sometimes associated with toxicity. Different treatment regimens have been used in ivermectin toxicosis. The present report describes a successful reversal of ivermectin toxicity by intravenous administration of a commercially available lipid emulsion in a captive African lion (Panthera leo). A 2-year old captive African lion (Panthera leo) weighing ~130 kg was presented with acute neurological impairment and bilateral blindness that had developed 24 h after ivermectin exposure. The animal was treated with a commercially available lipid emulsion along with supportive therapy and experienced complete recovery. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of the use of lipid emulsion in the management of ivermectin induced blindness in an African lion and it appears that intravenous lipid emulsion may be an effective therapy in ivermectin toxicity in lions. Further testing in expanded clinical trials is clearly warranted.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 4%
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Student > Master 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 12 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Environmental Science 2 7%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 2 7%

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 28 November 2015.
All research outputs
#2,947,182
of 6,615,543 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#397
of 1,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,701
of 250,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#19
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,615,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 52nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,031 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 250,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.