Comparison of manual and automated endothelial cell density analysis in normal eyes and DSEK eyes

Cornea

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 567-573

  Price, Marianne O ^a   Fairchild, Kelly M ^a   Price, Francis W ^b  

^a Lautert)   (United States)

^b PRICE VISION GROUP   (United States)

Author keywords

confocal microscopy; Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty; Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty; endothelial cell density; endothelial keratoplasty; specular microscopy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; AUTOMATED ENDOTHELIAL CELL DENSITY ANALYSIS; CELL DENSITY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONFOCAL MICROSCOPE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORNEA ENDOTHELIUM; DESCEMET STRIPPING ENDOTHELIAL KERATOPLASTY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CELL COUNT; DESCEMET STRIPPING ENDOTHELIAL KERATOPLASTY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; ENDOTHELIUM, CORNEAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84876288734     PISSN: 02773740     EISSN: 15364798     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31825de8fa     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Bourne WM, Nelson LR, Hodge DO. Central corneal endothelial cell changes over a ten-year period. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38: 779-782. (Pubitemid 27143150)
2. Cornea Donor Study Investigator Group. Donor age and corneal endothelial cell loss 5 years after successful corneal transplantation. Specular microscopy ancillary study results. Ophthalmology. 2008;115: 627-632.
3. Price MO, Fairchild KM, Price DA, Price FW Jr. Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty: five-year graft survival and endothelial cell loss. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:725-729.
4. Kitzmann AS, Winter EJ, Nau CB, et al. Comparison of corneal endothelial cell images from a noncontact specular microscope and a scanning confocal microscope. Cornea. 2005;24:980-984. (Pubitemid 41688535)
5. Raecker ME, McLaren JW, Kittleson KM, Patel SV. Endothelial image quality after descemet stripping with endothelial keratoplasty: a comparison of three microscopy techniques. Eye Contact Lens. 2011;37:6-10.
6. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1: 307-310. (Pubitemid 16134762)
7. Goldich Y, Marcovich AL, Barkana Y, et al. Comparison of corneal endothelial cell density estimated with 2 noncontact specular microscopes. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2010;20:825-830.
8. Imre L, Nagymihaly A. Reliability and reproducibility of corneal endothelial image analysis by in vivo confocal microscopy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2001;239:356-360. (Pubitemid 32600192)
9. Klais CM, Buhren J, Kohnen T. Comparison of endothelial cell count using confocal and contact specular microscopy. Ophthalmologica. 2003;217:99-103. (Pubitemid 36237703)
10. Hirneiss C, Schumann RG, Gruterich M, et al. Endothelial cell density in donor corneas: a comparison of automatic software programs with manual counting. Cornea. 2007;26:80-83. (Pubitemid 46041568)
11. Hara M, Morishige N, Chikama T, Nishida T. Comparison of confocal biomicroscopy and noncontact specular microscopy for evaluation of the corneal endothelium. Cornea. 2003;22:512-515. (Pubitemid 36909728)
12. Doughty MJ, Muller A, Zaman ML. Assessment of the reliability of human corneal endothelial cell-density estimates using a noncontact specular microscope. Cornea. 2000;19:148-158. (Pubitemid 30140816)
13. Salvetat ML, Zeppieri M, Miani F, et al. Comparison between laser scanning in vivo confocal microscopy and noncontact specular microscopy in assessing corneal endothelial cell density and central corneal thickness. Cornea. 2011;30:754-759.