IOVS Clinical Microbiology Reviews
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2007;48:3077-3082.)
© 2007 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
DOI:  10.1167/iovs.06-1162

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Deb-Joardar, N.
Right arrow Articles by Gain, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Deb-Joardar, N.
Right arrow Articles by Gain, P.

Comparison of Two Semiautomated Methods for Evaluating Endothelial Cells of Eye Bank Corneas

Nilanjana Deb-Joardar,1,2 Gilles Thuret,1,2 Min Zhao,1 Sophie Acquart,3 Michel Péoc’h,1 Olivier Garraud,3 and Philippe Gain1,2

1From the Laboratory for Biology, Engineering and Imaging of Corneal Grafts, Faculty of Medicine, Saint Etienne, France.

PURPOSE. To compare two semiautomated methods of evaluating endothelial cells of eye bank corneas.

METHODS. Using a commercially available semiautomatic endothelial analyzer, seven observers determined the endothelial cell density (ECD), coefficient of variation (CV) of cell area, and the percentage of hexagonal cells (hexagonality) of the light microscopic images of the endothelium of 30 organ-cultured corneas. The image quality was graded as good, average, and poor. Border (contour detection and manual retouch) and center (indicating cell centers) methods for identifying endothelial cells were compared. The interobserver variability in ECD determination (indicating reproducibility) and morphometry was statistically analyzed by using the two methods. The importance of accurate pointing of cell centers was assessed by counting on 10 standard photolithographic mosaics and noting the time taken.

RESULTS. There was no significant difference in the interobserver variability or between ECDs obtained by the border and center methods. Decrease in image quality had a similar influence on both methods. Although measurement of hexagonality was acceptable by both methods, the CV was reliable only with the border method, with a significant underestimation by the center method. However, an accurate indication of cell center slightly improved the CV estimation.

CONCLUSIONS. Although both the border and center methods of semiautomatic evaluation of eye bank corneas measure similar ECD with a similar reproducibility, only the border method gives a reliable morphometry.





This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
IOVSHome page
M. Zhao, G. Thuret, S. Piselli, A. Pipparelli, S. Acquart, M. Peoc'h, J.-M. Dumollard, and P. Gain
Use of Poloxamers for Deswelling of Organ-Cultured Corneas
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2008; 49(2): 550 - 559.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology