Literature DB >> 17457193

Comparison of in vivo confocal microscopy of human cornea by white light scanning slit and laser scanning systems.

Jacek P Szaflik1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare in vivo corneal imaging by scanning slit white light and laser confocal microscopy systems.
METHODS: Twenty healthy individuals and 10 patients with corneal dystrophies including Fuchs, granular, Map-Dot-Fingerprint dystrophies, and amiodarone-induced keratopathy were examined with the ConfoScan 3 (Nidek Technologies) scanning slit white light confocal microscope equipped with x40 front lens (Zeiss) and the Rostock Cornea Module (RCM) for HRT II (Heidelberg Engineering) laser confocal microscopy system equipped with Olympus x60 front lens. The endothelial cell density counts were performed and results were compared. For additional validation of endothelial cells density results, separate counts were carried out using the specular microscope SP-1000 (Topcon).
RESULTS: The healthy and pathologically changed corneal structures are imaged in a similar manner by both systems. The differences in quality of acquired images in contrast and brightness between the systems are debatable, although the laser system was more efficient for epithelium imaging and white light scanning slit was better for evaluation of endothelium. Some of the examinations completed with the laser system, which requires applanating its front lens to the cornea, imaged dark striae in posterior stroma and Descemet membrane folds, resembling those observed in corneal pathologies, whereas most were probably induced by the pressure applied to the cornea during examination. All the results of cell density (for patients and for subjects with no ophthalmic disease) counts performed with the RCM (laser system) were higher than those with the ConfoScan 3 (scanning slit system) by 36.7% +/- 11.9% (SD) and 30.2% +/- 11.3% higher than SP-1000 (specular). The difference in cell counts between the RCM and other methods was increasing at higher cell densities.
CONCLUSIONS: The morphologic findings in examinations performed with the laser confocal microscopy system are generally comparable to white light scanning slit confocal microscopy. Direct applanation of the front lens of the laser system to the cornea may generate certain changes in confocal microscopy outcomes, including imaging of Descemet membrane folds and dark lines in stroma, which should be differentiated from pathologic alterations. Comparison of the endothelium cell density counts obtained with the 2 systems should be made cautiously because significant differences might occur--RCM configured with the Olympus x60 front lens was found to overestimate the results compared with both CS3 and SP-1000 microscopes, with the range of disparity increasing for higher cell densities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17457193     DOI: 10.1097/ICO.0b013e31803dcd11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cornea        ISSN: 0277-3740            Impact factor:   2.651


  13 in total

1.  Corneal nerve regeneration after herpes simplex keratitis: A longitudinal in vivo confocal microscopy study.

Authors:  Hamid-Reza Moein; Ahmad Kheirkhah; Rodrigo T Muller; Andrea C Cruzat; Deborah Pavan-Langston; Pedram Hamrah
Journal:  Ocul Surf       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 5.033

2.  Aging and corneal layers: an in vivo corneal confocal microscopy study.

Authors:  Catia Gambato; Evelyn Longhin; Anton Giulio Catania; Daniela Lazzarini; Raffaele Parrozzani; Edoardo Midena
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 3.  Imaging the Corneal Endothelium in Fuchs Corneal Endothelial Dystrophy.

Authors:  Stephan Ong Tone; Ula Jurkunas
Journal:  Semin Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-06-19       Impact factor: 1.975

4.  Comparison of deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty with respect to postoperative corneal sensitivity and tear film function.

Authors:  Xiaolei Lin; Binbin Xu; Yifang Sun; Jing Zhong; Weilan Huang; Jin Yuan
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  In vivo confocal microscopic findings in Lisch corneal dystrophy.

Authors:  Kristina Kurbanyan; Kunjal D Sejpal; Anthony J Aldave; Sophie X Deng
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.651

6.  DNA damage and repair in Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy.

Authors:  Piotr Czarny; Ewelina Kasprzak; Mariusz Wielgorski; Monika Udziela; Beata Markiewicz; Janusz Blasiak; Jerzy Szaflik; Jacek P Szaflik
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2012-12-29       Impact factor: 2.316

7.  Genetics of Meesmann corneal dystrophy: a novel mutation in the keratin 3 gene in an asymptomatic family suggests genotype-phenotype correlation.

Authors:  Jacek P Szaflik; Monika Ołdak; Radosław B Maksym; Anna Kamińska; Agnieszka Pollak; Monika Udziela; Rafał Płoski; Jerzy Szaflik
Journal:  Mol Vis       Date:  2008-09-15       Impact factor: 2.367

8.  Polymorphism of the transferrin gene in eye diseases: keratoconus and Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy.

Authors:  Katarzyna A Wójcik; Ewelina Synowiec; Manuel P Jiménez-García; Anna Kaminska; Piotr Polakowski; Janusz Blasiak; Jerzy Szaflik; Jacek P Szaflik
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-11-24       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Variation in DNA Base Excision Repair Genes in Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy.

Authors:  Katarzyna A Wójcik; Ewelina Synowiec; Piotr Polakowski; Janusz Błasiak; Jerzy Szaflik; Jacek P Szaflik
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2015-09-21

10.  Polymorphisms of the homologous recombination gene RAD51 in keratoconus and Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy.

Authors:  Ewelina Synowiec; Katarzyna A Wojcik; Justyna Izdebska; Ewelina Binczyk; Janusz Blasiak; Jerzy Szaflik; Jacek P Szaflik
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 3.434

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.