Validity of endothelial cell analysis methods and recommendations for calibration in topcon SP-2000P specular microscopy

Cornea

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 538-544

  Van Schaick, Willem ^a   Van Dooren, Bart T H ^b   Mulder, Paul G H ^c   Völker Dieben, Hennie J M ^d  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ROTTERDAM EYE HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^c ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Calibration; Endothelial cell density; Specular microscopy; Validity of assessment methods

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; CELL DENSITY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; ENDOTHELIUM CELL; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEASUREMENT; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPECULAR MICROSCOPY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CALIBRATION; CELL COUNT; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; ENDOTHELIUM, CORNEAL; HUMANS; MICROSCOPY; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 21244450408     PISSN: 02773740     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.ico.0000151505.03824.6c     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Vecchi M, Braccio L, Orsoni JG. The Topcon SP 1000 and Image-NET systems. A comparison of four methods for evaluating corneal endothelial cell density. Cornea. 1996;15:271-277.
2. Ohno K, Nelson LR, McLaren JW, et al. Comparison of recording systems and analysis methods in specular microscopy. Cornea. 1999;18:416-423.
3. Benetz BA, Diaconu E, Bowlin SJ, et al. Comparison of corneal endothelial image analysis by Konan SP8000 noncontact and Bio-Optics Bambi Systems. Cornea. 1999;18:67-72.
4. Waring GO 3rd, Krohn MA, Ford GE, et al. Four methods of measuring human corneal endothelial cells from specular photomicrographs. Arch Ophthalmol 1980;98:848-855.
5. Doughty MJ. Toward a quantitative analysis of corneal endothelial cell morphology: a review of techniques and their application. Optom Vis Sci. 1989;66:626-642.
6. Gundersen HJG. Notes on the estimation of the numerical density of arbitrary profiles: the edge effect. J Microsc. 1977;111:219-223.
7. Sperling S, Gundersen HJG. The precision of unbiased estimates of numerical density of endothelial cells in donor corneas. Acta Ophthalmol. 1978;56:793-802.
8. Pitman E. A note on normal correlation. Biometrika. 1939;31:9-12.
9. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;307-310.
10. Modis L, Langenbucher A, Seitz B. Corneal endothelial cell density and pachymetry measured by contact and noncontact specular microscopy. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002;28:1763-1769.
11. Doughty MJ, Müller A, Zaman ML. Assessment of the reliability of human corneal endothelial cell-density estimates using a noncontact specular microscope. Cornea. 2000;19:148-158.
12. Landesz M, Kamps A, Slart R, et al. Morphometric analysis of the corneal endothelium with three different specular microscopes. Doc Ophthalmol. 1995;90:15-28.
13. Landesz M, Siertsema JV, Van Rij G. Comparative study of three semiautomated specular microscopes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995;21:409-416.
14. Seitz B, Muller EE, Langenbucher A, et al. O. Reproducibility and validity of a new automatic method of specular microscopy analysis of corneal endothelium. Ophthalmologe. 1997;94:127-135.