Cambas AAA, Guerra AM, de Prada SC, Delgado CO, García LTG

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 359-368
PDF size: 273.47 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: to compare the results of the corneal endothelium analysis through the automated software and its manual correction.
Methods: a longitudinal, comparative and descriptive study of the endothelial microscopy performed on 20 healthy adults (40 eyes). Three images from each eye were taken to select the best quality one in order to later make manual correction of the software on the computer screen. The information from the database was processed by the SPSS statistical program version 19. The quantitative variables were expressed as per their respective summary measures whereas Student's t test measured the level of association among the studied variables (total number of identified cells, variability coefficient, cell density and hexagonality index). The 95% confidence interval and the error below 0,05 % were used.
Results: the manual drawing of cell contours yielded cell density, hexagonality index and variation coefficient values similar to those of other studies. The first analyzed and compared index was the number of cells that the software identified by recognizing the cell limits based on color changes. The mean ranged from 106,8 for the right eye with a range of 121/88 to 105,05 for the left eye with a range of 121/79, being the standard deviation of 9,393. On the other hand, the manual correction increased the mean for all the age groups to 113,5 for the right eye (range 151/80) and 112,1 for the left eye (range of 147/88), being the standard deviation of 13,657. As it may be observed, the number of cells for both eyes significantly changed and there were cells which were either unidentified or taken as doubles; these are errors that may be manually corrected, thus changing the set values of the software.
Conclusions: the choice of manually drawing the cell limits on the screen for the analysis of the quantitative parameters of the corneal endothelium proves to be effective during the specular microscopy.

REFERENCES

1. Vogt A. Die Sichtbarkeit des lebenden Hornhautendothels im Lichtbüschel der gullstrandschen Spaltlampe. Klin MonatsblAugenheilkd. 1919;63:233-4.

2. Maurice DM. Cellular membrane activity in the corneal endothelium of the intact eye. Experientia. 1968;24:1094.

3. Laing RA, Sandstrom MM, Leibowitz HM. ln vivo photomicrography of the corneal endothelium. Arch Ophthalmol. 1975;93:143.

4. Laing R, Sandstrom M, Leibowitz H. Clinical specular microscopy. I. Optical principles. Arch Ophthalmol. 1979;97:1714-9.

5. Orts P, Calatayud M, Rodrigo F, Belmonte J. Biomicroscopia especular en córneas donantes antes de la queratoplastia y tras un año de seguimiento. Microcir Ocul. 2004;12(1):5-8.

6. Pérez Torregrosa DV, Cisneros A, Harto M, Maldonado M, Cervera M, Menezo JL, et al. Método de análisis endotelial mediante microscopia especular de no-contacto y sistema de análisis por la imagen en una serie de voluntarios sanos. Ann Oftalmol. 1995 [citado 12 de junio de 2014];5(3). Disponible en: http://www.nexusediciones.com/np_ao_1995_5_3_003.htm

7. Díaz Couchoud P, Duch Bordás F, Martínez Camps E, Carceller A, Bruix A, Doñate T, de la Cámara J. Estudio de la patología corneal en pacientes con insuficiencia renal crónica en programa de hemodiálisis. Ann Oftalmol. 1997 [citado 12 de junio de 2014];7(4). Disponible en: http://europa.sim.ucm.es/compludoc/ AA?articuloId=337002

8. Schultz RO, Glasser DB, Matsuda M. Response of the corneal endothelium to cataract surgery. Arch Ophthalmol. 1986;104:1164-9.

9. Krachmer J. Microscopia especular. Los requisitos en Oftalmología. Madrid: Mosby; 2000.

10. Mishima S. Clinical investigations on the corneal endothelium. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;93:1-35.

11. Shaw EL, Rao GN, Arthur EJ, Aquavella JV. The function reserve of corneal endothelium. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1978;85:640-5.

12. Boume WM, Kaufman HE. Specular microscopy of human corneal endothelium in vivo. Am J Ophthalmol. 1976;81(3)15:319-23.

13. Yee RW, Matsuda M, Schultz RO. Changes in the normal corneal endothelial cellular pattern as a function of age. Curr Eye Res. 1985;4:671-8.

14. Williams KK, Noe RL, Grossniklaus HE, Drews-Botchs C, Edelhauser HF. Correlation of histologic corneal endothelial cell counts with specular microscopic cell density. Arch Ophthalmol. 1992;110(8):1146-9.

15. Waring GO, Bourne WM, Edelhauser HF, Kenyon KR. The corneal endothelium. Normal and pathologic structure and function. Ophthalmol. 1982;89(6):531-90.

16. Matsuda M, Suda T, Manabe R. Serial alterations in endothelial cell shape and pattern intraocular surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984;98(3):313-9.

17. Mac Rae SM, Matsuda M, Phillips DS. The long-term effects of polymethylmethacrylate contact lens wear on the corneal endothelium. Ophthalmol. 1994;101(2):365-70.

18. Nasser-Hashemian M, Moghiami S, Aghsaide Fard M. Corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in normal Iranian eyes. BMC Ophthalmol. 2006;6:9.

19. Elis D, Aristizábal D, Gris O, Guell J, Arrondo E. Estudio endotelial con microscopia especular. En: Lorente R. Catarata & Glaucoma. Madrid: Secoir; 2012. p. 92-5.

20. Arnavielle S, Lafontaine PO, Bidot S. Corneal endothelial cell changes after trabeculectomy and deep sclerotomy. J Glauc. 2007;16:324-8.