Comparison of corneal endothelial cell density estimated with 2 noncontact specular microscopes

European Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 825-830

  Goldich, Yakov ^a   Marcovich, Arie L ^b   Barkana, Yaniv ^a   Hartstein, Morris ^a   Morad, Yair ^a   Avni, Isaac ^a   Zadok, David ^a  

^a ASSAF HAROFEH MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

^b KAPLAN MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Corneal endothelium; Endothelial cell density; Noncontact specular microscopy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUTOANALYSIS; CALCULATION; CELL DENSITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORNEA ENDOTHELIUM; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; ENDOTHELIAL MICROSCOPE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MICROSCOPE IMAGE; NONCONTACT SPECULAR MICROSCOPE; NORMAL HUMAN; OPTICAL INSTRUMENTATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPECULAR MICROSCOPY; VOLUNTEER; CELL COUNT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CYTOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; MICROSCOPY; MIDDLE AGED; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ADULT; CELL COUNT; ENDOTHELIUM, CORNEAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MICROSCOPY; MIDDLE AGED; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77957583796     PISSN: 11206721     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/112067211002000503     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Pop M, Payette Y. Initial results of endothelial cell counts after Artisan lens for phakic eyes: an evaluation of the United States Food and Drug Administration Ophtec Study. Ophthalmology 2004; 111: 309-17.
2. Nassiri N, Nassiri N, Rahnavardi M, Rahmani L. A comparison of corneal endothelial cell changes after 1-site and 2-site phacotrabeculectomy. Cornea 2008; 27: 889-94.
3. Bahar I, Kaiserman I, Srinivasan S, Ya-Ping J, Slomovic AR, Rootman DS. Comparison of three different techniques of corneal transplantation for keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol 2008; 146: 905-12, e901.
4. Kim SY, Park YH, Lee YC. Comparison of the effect of intracameral moxifloxacin, levofloxacin and cefazolin on rabbit corneal endothelial cells. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2008; 36: 367-70.
5. McCarey BE, Edelhauser HF, Lynn MJ. Review of corneal endothelial specular microscopy for FDA clinical trials of refractive procedures, surgical devices, and new intraocular drugs and solutions. Cornea 2008; 27: 1-16.
6. Gundersen H, Notes on the estimation of the numerical density of arbitrary profiles: the edge effect. J Microsc 1977; 111: 223.
7. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999; 8: 135-60.
8. Hirneiss C, Schumann RG, Gruterich M, Welge-Luessen UC, Kampik A, Neubauer AS. Endothelial cell density in donor corneas: a comparison of automatic software programs with manual counting. Cornea 2007; 26: 80-3.
9. Thuret G, Deb-Joardar N, Zhao M, Gain P, Gavet Y, Nguyen F. Agreement between two non-contact specular microscopes: Topcon SP2000P versus Rhine-Tec. Br J Ophthalmol 2007; 91: 979-80.
10. Landesz M, Siertsema JV, Van Rij G. Comparative study of three semiautomated specular microscopes. J Cataract Refract Surg 1995; 21: 409-16.
11. van Schaick W, van Dooren BT, Mulder PG, Volker-Dieben HJ. Validity of endothelial cell analysis methods and recommendations for calibration in Topcon SP-2000P specular microscopy. Cornea 2005; 24: 538-44.
12. Prinz A, Varga J, Findl O. Reliability of a video-based non-contact specular microscope for assessing the corneal endothelium. Cornea 2007; 26: 924-9.
13. Garsd A, Ford GE, Waring GO III, Rosenblatt LS. Sample size for estimating the quantiles of endothelial cell-area distribution. Biometrics 1983; 39: 385-94.
14. Doughty MJ, Muller A, Zaman ML. Assessment of the reliability of human corneal endothelial cell-density estimates using a noncontact specular microscope. Cornea 2000; 19: 148-58.
15. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Corneal endothelial photography: three-year revision. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 1360-5.
16. American Academy of Ophthalmology. Corneal endothelial photography. Ophthalmology 1991; 98: 1464-8.