Cargando…
Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy
PURPOSE: To determine the reliability of corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) obtained by automated specular microscopy versus that of validated manual methods and factors that predict such reliability. METHODS: Sharp central images from 94 control and 106 glaucomatous eyes were captured with Kona...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6039579/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28797649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2017.06.001 |
_version_ | 1783338702818246656 |
---|---|
author | Huang, Jianyan Maram, Jyotsna Tepelus, Tudor C. Modak, Cristina Marion, Ken Sadda, SriniVas R. Chopra, Vikas Lee, Olivia L. |
author_facet | Huang, Jianyan Maram, Jyotsna Tepelus, Tudor C. Modak, Cristina Marion, Ken Sadda, SriniVas R. Chopra, Vikas Lee, Olivia L. |
author_sort | Huang, Jianyan |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To determine the reliability of corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) obtained by automated specular microscopy versus that of validated manual methods and factors that predict such reliability. METHODS: Sharp central images from 94 control and 106 glaucomatous eyes were captured with Konan specular microscope NSP-9900. All images were analyzed by trained graders using Konan CellChek Software, employing the fully- and semi-automated methods as well as Center Method. Images with low cell count (input cells number <100) and/or guttata were compared with the Center and Flex-Center Methods. ECDs were compared and absolute error was used to assess variation. The effect on ECD of age, cell count, cell size, and cell size variation was evaluated. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed between the Center and Flex-Center Methods in corneas with guttata (p = 0.48) or low ECD (p = 0.11). No difference (p = 0.32) was observed in ECD of normal controls <40 yrs old between the fully-automated method and manual Center Method. However, in older controls and glaucomatous eyes, ECD was overestimated by the fully-automated method (p = 0.034) and semi-automated method (p = 0.025) as compared to manual method. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that automated analysis significantly overestimates ECD in the eyes with high polymegathism and/or large cell size, compared to the manual method. Therefore, we discourage reliance upon the fully-automated method alone to perform specular microscopy analysis, particularly if an accurate ECD value is imperative. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6039579 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60395792018-07-12 Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy Huang, Jianyan Maram, Jyotsna Tepelus, Tudor C. Modak, Cristina Marion, Ken Sadda, SriniVas R. Chopra, Vikas Lee, Olivia L. J Optom Original article PURPOSE: To determine the reliability of corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) obtained by automated specular microscopy versus that of validated manual methods and factors that predict such reliability. METHODS: Sharp central images from 94 control and 106 glaucomatous eyes were captured with Konan specular microscope NSP-9900. All images were analyzed by trained graders using Konan CellChek Software, employing the fully- and semi-automated methods as well as Center Method. Images with low cell count (input cells number <100) and/or guttata were compared with the Center and Flex-Center Methods. ECDs were compared and absolute error was used to assess variation. The effect on ECD of age, cell count, cell size, and cell size variation was evaluated. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed between the Center and Flex-Center Methods in corneas with guttata (p = 0.48) or low ECD (p = 0.11). No difference (p = 0.32) was observed in ECD of normal controls <40 yrs old between the fully-automated method and manual Center Method. However, in older controls and glaucomatous eyes, ECD was overestimated by the fully-automated method (p = 0.034) and semi-automated method (p = 0.025) as compared to manual method. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that automated analysis significantly overestimates ECD in the eyes with high polymegathism and/or large cell size, compared to the manual method. Therefore, we discourage reliance upon the fully-automated method alone to perform specular microscopy analysis, particularly if an accurate ECD value is imperative. Elsevier 2018 2017-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6039579/ /pubmed/28797649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2017.06.001 Text en © 2017 Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. on behalf of Spanish General Council of Optometry. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original article Huang, Jianyan Maram, Jyotsna Tepelus, Tudor C. Modak, Cristina Marion, Ken Sadda, SriniVas R. Chopra, Vikas Lee, Olivia L. Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
title | Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
title_full | Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
title_fullStr | Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
title_short | Comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
title_sort | comparison of manual & automated analysis methods for corneal endothelial cell density measurements by specular microscopy |
topic | Original article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6039579/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28797649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2017.06.001 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huangjianyan comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT maramjyotsna comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT tepelustudorc comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT modakcristina comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT marionken comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT saddasrinivasr comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT chopravikas comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy AT leeolivial comparisonofmanualautomatedanalysismethodsforcornealendothelialcelldensitymeasurementsbyspecularmicroscopy |