📇 Rhumatologue · ST HERBLAIN CEDEX · (44) · Salarié
Chargement de la fiche…
Chargement de la fiche…
MonRhumato.fr utilise des cookies pour mesurer l'audience (statistiques) et améliorer le site. Aucune donnée de santé identifiable n'est jamais collectée. Politique de confidentialité.
Votre choix est conservé 13 mois (durée max CNIL). Vous pouvez le modifier à tout moment via Préférences cookies.
2 raisons identifiées
Disponibilité géographique
3 lieux d'exercice — choisissez celui qui vous arrange
Délais de RDV courts dans la région
129.9 rhumatos / 100 000 hab. — département bien doté
✨ Génération du profil synthétique IA en cours…
Indicateurs publics agrégés sur 250 M+ d'œuvres scientifiques (OpenAlex, PubMed). Traduits ici en langage patient.
Influence scientifique
Données ANS publiques (Licence Ouverte 2.0) · Enrichissements MonRhumato 100 % opt-in · Toute personne référencée peut demander la suppression ou la rectification.
6
6 articles ont été cités au moins 6fois par d'autres chercheurs — preuve que ses travaux sont repris par la communauté médicale.
h-index
Total citations reçues
241
Nombre de fois où d'autres équipes ont mentionné ses publications dans leurs propres travaux.
Publications totales
13
Articles, revues et chapitres référencés dans les bases académiques internationales.
Articles influents
4
Publications ayant marqué leur domaine — chacune citée au moins 10 fois par d'autres chercheurs.
i10-index
Thématiques principales
Affiliations FR : Institut Génétique Nantes Atlantique
Source : OpenAlex (CC0, OurResearch). Indicateurs académiques agrégés sur 250 M+ d'œuvres.
Articles déposés en accès libre sur l'archive ouverte des universités françaises (HAL) — gage d'activité de recherche en France.
Spontaneous Peeling of the Internal Limiting Membrane during Epiretinal Membrane Surgery
2025ArticleOphthalmology Retina
Pros and cons of internal limiting membrane peeling during epiretinal membrane surgery: a randomised clinical trial with microperimetry (PEELING)
2024ArticleBritish Journal of Ophthalmology
Source : HAL — archive ouverte CCSD/CNRS (couvre articles, chapitres EMC, communications congrès, thèses).
KAIROS
AVENUE CLAUDE BERNARD, 44819 ST HERBLAIN CEDEX
KAIROS
4 BOULEVARD PIERRE DE GONDY, 44270 MACHECOUL
KAIROS
BATIMENT 1 IMMEUBLE NANT ILE 35 BOULEVARD VINCENT GACHE, 44200 NANTES
Secteur de conventionnement non disponible (médecin hospitalier ou non présent dans l'Annuaire santé CNAM des libéraux conventionnés).
Lien Doctolib = recherche Google site:doctolib.fr (le 1er résultat est presque toujours le profil correct s'il existe).
European journal of ophthalmology · 2015
Purpose To assess the efficacy of a single dexamethasone intravitreal implant (Dex-I) injection for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). Methods This was a retrospective chart review of 39 eyes (34 consecutive patients). Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT), and increase in intraocular pressure (IOP) (>24 mm Hg) were analyzed before treatment and 2 and 4 months after injection. Results Preoperative mean CMT was 559 ± 111 μm and decreased to 338 ± 84 and 477 ± 140 μm 2 and 4 months after injection, respectively. Although all eyes showed a significant decrease in CMT 2 months after injection (p<0.0001), a recurrence of the macular edema was observed 4 months after injection in 79% of eyes. Mean BCVA improvement (logMAR) was 0.13 ± 0.18 (p<0.0001) and 0.07 ± 0.21 (p = 0.049) 2 and 4 months after injection, respectively, without significant difference between vitrectomized and nonvitrectomized eyes. Eight eyes (21%) developed reversible increase in IOP 2 months after injection. Conclusions Thirty percent of DME eyes had gained more than 2 logMAR lines 2 months after Dex-I injection and safety was good. Visual acuity gain was maintained 4 months after injection despite a recurrence of edema in most cases.
The British journal of ophthalmology · 2024
BackgroundAfter idiopathic epiretinal membrane (iERM) removal, it is unclear whether the internal limiting membrane (ILM) should be removed. The objective was to assess if active ILM peeling after iERM removal could induce microscotomas.MethodsThe PEELING study is a national randomised clinical trial. When no spontaneous ILM peeling occurred, patients were randomised either to the ILM peeling or no ILM peeling group. Groups were compared at the month 1 (M1), M6 and M12 visits in terms of microperimetry, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and optical coherence tomography findings. The primary outcome was the difference in microscotoma number between baseline and M6.Results213 patients were included, 101 experienced spontaneous ILM peeling and 100 were randomised to the ILM peeling (n=51) or no ILM peeling group (n=49). The difference in microscotoma number between both groups was significant at M1 (3.9 more microscotomas in ILM peeling group, (0.8;7.0) p=0.0155) but not at M6 (2.1 more microscotomas in ILM peeling group (−0.5;4.7) p=0.1155). Only in the no ILM peeling group, the number of microscotomas significantly decreased and the mean retinal sensitivity significantly improved. The ERM recurred in nine patients in the no ILM peeling group (19.6%) versus zero in the ILM peeling group (p=0.0008): two of them underwent revision surgery. There was no difference in mean BCVA and microperimetry between patients experiencing or not a recurrence at M12.ConclusionSpontaneous ILM peeling is very common. Active ILM peeling prevents anatomical ERM recurrence but may induce retinal impairments and delay visual recovery.Trial RegistrationNCT02146144.
Trials · 2020
Abstract Background The epiretinal membrane (ERM) is a degenerative condition associated with age, which can cause loss of vision and/or metamorphopsia. The treatment of symptomatic ERM involves surgical removal including a vitrectomy followed by peeling of the ERM using a microforceps. As the internal limiting membrane (ILM) is adherent to the ERM, it is sometimes removed with it (spontaneous peeling). If ILM remains in place, it can be removed to reduce ERM recurrence. However, it is important to clarify the safety of ILM peeling, while it increases surgical risks and cause histological disorganization of the retina that can lead to microscotomas, may be responsible for definitive visual discomfort. Methods PEELING is a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind, and multicentered trial with two parallel arms. This study investigates the benefit/risk ratio of active ILM peeling among individuals undergoing ERM surgery without spontaneous ILM peeling. Randomization is done in the operating room after ERM removal if ILM remains in place. After randomization, the two groups—“active peeling of the ILM” and “no peeling of the ILM”—are compared during a total of three follow-up visits scheduled at month 1, month 6, and month 12. Primary endpoint is the difference in microscotomas before surgery and 6 months after surgery. Patients with spontaneous peeling are not randomized and are included in the ancillary study with the same follow-up visits and the same examinations as the principal study. Relevant inclusion criteria involve individuals aged > 18 years living with idiopathic symptomatic ERM, including pseudophakic patients with transparent posterior capsule or open capsule or lensed patients with age-related cataracts. The calculated sample size corresponds to 53 randomized eyes (one eye/patient) per arm that means 106 randomized eyes (106 randomized patients) in total and a maximum of 222 included patients (116 spontaneous peeling). Discussion ILM peeling is often practiced in ERM surgery to reduce ERM recurrence. It does not impair postoperative visual acuity, but it increases the surgical risks and causes anatomical damages. If active ILM peeling is significantly associated with more microscotomas, it may contraindicate the ILM peeling during primitive idiopathic ERM surgery. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02146144 . Registered on 22 May 2014. Recruitment is still ongoing.
Source PubMed · Recherche par auteur (homonymes possibles, vérifier l'affiliation).
Ophthalmology. Retina · 2025 · Journal Article
Eude Y, Poinas A, Volteau C, Lebreton O, et al.
The British journal of ophthalmology · 2024 · Journal Article
Ducloyer JB, Eude Y, Volteau C, Lebreton O, et al.
Trials · 2020 · Clinical Trial Protocol
Ducloyer JB, Ivan J, Poinas A, Lebreton O, et al.
European journal of ophthalmology · 2015 · Journal Article
Bonnin S, Dupas B, Sanharawi ME, Perol J, et al.
Does internal limiting membrane peeling during epiretinal membrane surgery induce microscotomas on microperimetry? Study protocol for PEELING, a randomized controlled clinical trial
Abstract Background The epiretinal membrane (ERM) is a degenerative condition associated with age, which can cause loss of vision and/or metamorphopsia. The treatment of symptomatic ERM involves surgical removal includin
Does internal limiting membrane peeling during epiretinal membrane surgery induce microscotomas on microperimetry? Study protocol for PEELING, a randomized controlled clinical trial
Abstract Background The epiretinal membrane (ERM) is a degenerative condition associated with age, which can cause loss of vision and/or metamorphopsia. The treatment of symptomatic ERM involves surgical removal includin
Source : DataCite — DOIs pour datasets, logiciels, protocoles, registres patient. Hors articles (déjà couverts).