Comparison of Manual and Automated Endothelial Cell Density Analysis in Normal Eyes and DSEK Eyes
PURPOSE:To compare automated endothelial cell density analysis with manual cell detection methods with 3 imaging devices. METHODS:In this prospective study, the corneal endothelium of 54 Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) eyes and 28 normal eyes was analyzed with a Nidek Confoscan 4...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Cornea 2013-05, Vol.32 (5), p.567-573 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 573 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 567 |
| container_title | Cornea |
| container_volume | 32 |
| creator | Price, Marianne O Fairchild, Kelly M Price, Francis W |
| description | PURPOSE:To compare automated endothelial cell density analysis with manual cell detection methods with 3 imaging devices.
METHODS:In this prospective study, the corneal endothelium of 54 Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) eyes and 28 normal eyes was analyzed with a Nidek Confoscan 4 confocal microscope using a 20× noncontact lens and with Tomey EM-3000 and Konan Noncon Robo SP-8800 specular microscopes. Testing order was randomized. The Confoscan and Robo images were presented in a blinded fashion to an experienced technician for manual cell identification and analysis using the manufacturerʼs software. A different operator determined endothelial cell density using fully automated software associated with each imaging device. Agreement between methods was assessed by repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey analysis.
RESULTS:Manual cell identification on Robo and Confoscan 4 images produced comparable cell density measurements in normal eyes (P = 0.73) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.11). The Confoscan automated cell detection software differed significantly from manual cell detection in both normal and DSEK eyes (P = 0.0003 and P < 0.0001, respectively). The Robo automated cell detection software produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.082) but significantly overestimated cell density in DSEK eyes (P < 0.0001). The EM-3000 automated cell detection produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.067) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.49).
CONCLUSIONS:Only 1 of 3 automated cell detection programs produced cell density readings comparable with those obtained with manual cell identification; the other 2 automated programs significantly overstated endothelial cell density in DSEK eyes. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31825de8fa |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1325333613</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1325333613</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356a-3b097b891b57fabb3f6437940df074350deb2edc21b34139f4bd8bd92af1f4ce3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEFv1DAQhS0EotvCP0DIRy5pbY8Tx8dVuqVVCz0A58iOx9oUJ17sRKv994Ruy6GHnkajee_NzEfIJ87OOdPq4qa5P2eWcUDgtSgd1t68ISteQlVIpeu3ZMWEUgUoyU7Iac4PjDGlKvGenAhRa2Bar4hp4rAzqc9xpNHTb2acTaBmdHQ9T3EwEzq6GV2cthj6ZdJgCPQSx9xPB7oeTTjkPtN-pN9jGpb55oD50X75Y3P72H0g77wJGT8-1TPy62rzs7ku7u6_3jTru6KDsjIF2OUpW2tuS-WNteArCUpL5jxTEkrm0Ap0neAWJAftpXW1dVoYz73sEM7Il2PuLsU_M-apHfrcLeeaEeOcWw6iBICKwyKVR2mXYs4JfbtL_WDSoeWs_Qe3XeC2L-Euts9PG2Y7oPtveqa5COqjYB_DhCn_DvMeU7tFE6bt69l_AcG3iTo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1325333613</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Manual and Automated Endothelial Cell Density Analysis in Normal Eyes and DSEK Eyes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Price, Marianne O ; Fairchild, Kelly M ; Price, Francis W</creator><creatorcontrib>Price, Marianne O ; Fairchild, Kelly M ; Price, Francis W</creatorcontrib><description>PURPOSE:To compare automated endothelial cell density analysis with manual cell detection methods with 3 imaging devices.
METHODS:In this prospective study, the corneal endothelium of 54 Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) eyes and 28 normal eyes was analyzed with a Nidek Confoscan 4 confocal microscope using a 20× noncontact lens and with Tomey EM-3000 and Konan Noncon Robo SP-8800 specular microscopes. Testing order was randomized. The Confoscan and Robo images were presented in a blinded fashion to an experienced technician for manual cell identification and analysis using the manufacturerʼs software. A different operator determined endothelial cell density using fully automated software associated with each imaging device. Agreement between methods was assessed by repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey analysis.
RESULTS:Manual cell identification on Robo and Confoscan 4 images produced comparable cell density measurements in normal eyes (P = 0.73) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.11). The Confoscan automated cell detection software differed significantly from manual cell detection in both normal and DSEK eyes (P = 0.0003 and P < 0.0001, respectively). The Robo automated cell detection software produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.082) but significantly overestimated cell density in DSEK eyes (P < 0.0001). The EM-3000 automated cell detection produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.067) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.49).
CONCLUSIONS:Only 1 of 3 automated cell detection programs produced cell density readings comparable with those obtained with manual cell identification; the other 2 automated programs significantly overstated endothelial cell density in DSEK eyes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0277-3740</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1536-4798</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31825de8fa</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22893099</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cell Count - instrumentation ; Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty ; Diagnostic Imaging - instrumentation ; Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological - instrumentation ; Endothelium, Corneal - cytology ; Endothelium, Corneal - pathology ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Observer Variation ; Prospective Studies ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Cornea, 2013-05, Vol.32 (5), p.567-573</ispartof><rights>2013 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356a-3b097b891b57fabb3f6437940df074350deb2edc21b34139f4bd8bd92af1f4ce3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356a-3b097b891b57fabb3f6437940df074350deb2edc21b34139f4bd8bd92af1f4ce3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22893099$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Price, Marianne O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fairchild, Kelly M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Price, Francis W</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Manual and Automated Endothelial Cell Density Analysis in Normal Eyes and DSEK Eyes</title><title>Cornea</title><addtitle>Cornea</addtitle><description>PURPOSE:To compare automated endothelial cell density analysis with manual cell detection methods with 3 imaging devices.
METHODS:In this prospective study, the corneal endothelium of 54 Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) eyes and 28 normal eyes was analyzed with a Nidek Confoscan 4 confocal microscope using a 20× noncontact lens and with Tomey EM-3000 and Konan Noncon Robo SP-8800 specular microscopes. Testing order was randomized. The Confoscan and Robo images were presented in a blinded fashion to an experienced technician for manual cell identification and analysis using the manufacturerʼs software. A different operator determined endothelial cell density using fully automated software associated with each imaging device. Agreement between methods was assessed by repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey analysis.
RESULTS:Manual cell identification on Robo and Confoscan 4 images produced comparable cell density measurements in normal eyes (P = 0.73) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.11). The Confoscan automated cell detection software differed significantly from manual cell detection in both normal and DSEK eyes (P = 0.0003 and P < 0.0001, respectively). The Robo automated cell detection software produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.082) but significantly overestimated cell density in DSEK eyes (P < 0.0001). The EM-3000 automated cell detection produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.067) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.49).
CONCLUSIONS:Only 1 of 3 automated cell detection programs produced cell density readings comparable with those obtained with manual cell identification; the other 2 automated programs significantly overstated endothelial cell density in DSEK eyes.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Cell Count - instrumentation</subject><subject>Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty</subject><subject>Diagnostic Imaging - instrumentation</subject><subject>Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological - instrumentation</subject><subject>Endothelium, Corneal - cytology</subject><subject>Endothelium, Corneal - pathology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0277-3740</issn><issn>1536-4798</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEFv1DAQhS0EotvCP0DIRy5pbY8Tx8dVuqVVCz0A58iOx9oUJ17sRKv994Ruy6GHnkajee_NzEfIJ87OOdPq4qa5P2eWcUDgtSgd1t68ISteQlVIpeu3ZMWEUgUoyU7Iac4PjDGlKvGenAhRa2Bar4hp4rAzqc9xpNHTb2acTaBmdHQ9T3EwEzq6GV2cthj6ZdJgCPQSx9xPB7oeTTjkPtN-pN9jGpb55oD50X75Y3P72H0g77wJGT8-1TPy62rzs7ku7u6_3jTru6KDsjIF2OUpW2tuS-WNteArCUpL5jxTEkrm0Ap0neAWJAftpXW1dVoYz73sEM7Il2PuLsU_M-apHfrcLeeaEeOcWw6iBICKwyKVR2mXYs4JfbtL_WDSoeWs_Qe3XeC2L-Euts9PG2Y7oPtveqa5COqjYB_DhCn_DvMeU7tFE6bt69l_AcG3iTo</recordid><startdate>201305</startdate><enddate>201305</enddate><creator>Price, Marianne O</creator><creator>Fairchild, Kelly M</creator><creator>Price, Francis W</creator><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201305</creationdate><title>Comparison of Manual and Automated Endothelial Cell Density Analysis in Normal Eyes and DSEK Eyes</title><author>Price, Marianne O ; Fairchild, Kelly M ; Price, Francis W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356a-3b097b891b57fabb3f6437940df074350deb2edc21b34139f4bd8bd92af1f4ce3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Cell Count - instrumentation</topic><topic>Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty</topic><topic>Diagnostic Imaging - instrumentation</topic><topic>Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological - instrumentation</topic><topic>Endothelium, Corneal - cytology</topic><topic>Endothelium, Corneal - pathology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Price, Marianne O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fairchild, Kelly M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Price, Francis W</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cornea</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Price, Marianne O</au><au>Fairchild, Kelly M</au><au>Price, Francis W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Manual and Automated Endothelial Cell Density Analysis in Normal Eyes and DSEK Eyes</atitle><jtitle>Cornea</jtitle><addtitle>Cornea</addtitle><date>2013-05</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>567</spage><epage>573</epage><pages>567-573</pages><issn>0277-3740</issn><eissn>1536-4798</eissn><abstract>PURPOSE:To compare automated endothelial cell density analysis with manual cell detection methods with 3 imaging devices.
METHODS:In this prospective study, the corneal endothelium of 54 Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) eyes and 28 normal eyes was analyzed with a Nidek Confoscan 4 confocal microscope using a 20× noncontact lens and with Tomey EM-3000 and Konan Noncon Robo SP-8800 specular microscopes. Testing order was randomized. The Confoscan and Robo images were presented in a blinded fashion to an experienced technician for manual cell identification and analysis using the manufacturerʼs software. A different operator determined endothelial cell density using fully automated software associated with each imaging device. Agreement between methods was assessed by repeated-measures analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey analysis.
RESULTS:Manual cell identification on Robo and Confoscan 4 images produced comparable cell density measurements in normal eyes (P = 0.73) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.11). The Confoscan automated cell detection software differed significantly from manual cell detection in both normal and DSEK eyes (P = 0.0003 and P < 0.0001, respectively). The Robo automated cell detection software produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.082) but significantly overestimated cell density in DSEK eyes (P < 0.0001). The EM-3000 automated cell detection produced results comparable with manual cell detection in normal eyes (P = 0.067) and DSEK eyes (P = 0.49).
CONCLUSIONS:Only 1 of 3 automated cell detection programs produced cell density readings comparable with those obtained with manual cell identification; the other 2 automated programs significantly overstated endothelial cell density in DSEK eyes.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc</pub><pmid>22893099</pmid><doi>10.1097/ICO.0b013e31825de8fa</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0277-3740 |
| ispartof | Cornea, 2013-05, Vol.32 (5), p.567-573 |
| issn | 0277-3740 1536-4798 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1325333613 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Cell Count - instrumentation Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty Diagnostic Imaging - instrumentation Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological - instrumentation Endothelium, Corneal - cytology Endothelium, Corneal - pathology Female Humans Male Middle Aged Observer Variation Prospective Studies Young Adult |
| title | Comparison of Manual and Automated Endothelial Cell Density Analysis in Normal Eyes and DSEK Eyes |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T02%3A00%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Manual%20and%20Automated%20Endothelial%20Cell%20Density%20Analysis%20in%20Normal%20Eyes%20and%20DSEK%20Eyes&rft.jtitle=Cornea&rft.au=Price,%20Marianne%20O&rft.date=2013-05&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=567&rft.epage=573&rft.pages=567-573&rft.issn=0277-3740&rft.eissn=1536-4798&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/ICO.0b013e31825de8fa&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1325333613%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1325333613&rft_id=info:pmid/22893099&rfr_iscdi=true |