Michael J Doughty1, Bente Monica Aakre. 1. Glasgow-Caledonian University, Department of Vision Sciences, Glasgow, Scotland. m.doughty@gcal.ac.uk
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare two methods of assessments of the coefficient of variation (COV) of endothelial cell area. METHODS: A single image (Topcon SP-2000P specular microscope) was obtained from the central region of the corneal endothelium of 45 healthy white (Norwegian) individuals, aged from 24 to 43 years and without a history of major eye disease or surgery. The image file was printed to A3-size, the cell-cell boundaries marked manually and the areas of the cells measured with a digitiser pad. The same image file was independently processed by the semi-automated Topcon IMAGEnet system. From either method, the cell area data from 100 contiguous cells approximately in the middle portion of the images were used to calculate the average cell area (AVG), the coefficient of variation (COV) on the cell areas and the endothelial cell density (ECD). RESULTS: Both methods produced similar AVG and ECD values that were not statistically different (p >or= 0.180). The SD values on the cell areas increased in relation to the AVG values (Pearson's r >or= 0.557). The resultant COV values were only marginally higher with the manual method (27.8 versus. 26.3 per cent) but the limits of agreement (LoA) for the COV values were rather large at -4.9 to +7.9 per cent. CONCLUSION: A semi-automated image analysis system can be used to generate COV data for the corneal endothelium similar to those of a manual method. The limits of agreement between the methods are substantial and this probably reflects the extreme sensitivity of the COV calculation to even a few different cell area values. This poor agreement needs to be considered in any comparative studies.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare two methods of assessments of the coefficient of variation (COV) of endothelial cell area. METHODS: A single image (Topcon SP-2000P specular microscope) was obtained from the central region of the corneal endothelium of 45 healthy white (Norwegian) individuals, aged from 24 to 43 years and without a history of major eye disease or surgery. The image file was printed to A3-size, the cell-cell boundaries marked manually and the areas of the cells measured with a digitiser pad. The same image file was independently processed by the semi-automated Topcon IMAGEnet system. From either method, the cell area data from 100 contiguous cells approximately in the middle portion of the images were used to calculate the average cell area (AVG), the coefficient of variation (COV) on the cell areas and the endothelial cell density (ECD). RESULTS: Both methods produced similar AVG and ECD values that were not statistically different (p >or= 0.180). The SD values on the cell areas increased in relation to the AVG values (Pearson's r >or= 0.557). The resultant COV values were only marginally higher with the manual method (27.8 versus. 26.3 per cent) but the limits of agreement (LoA) for the COV values were rather large at -4.9 to +7.9 per cent. CONCLUSION: A semi-automated image analysis system can be used to generate COV data for the corneal endothelium similar to those of a manual method. The limits of agreement between the methods are substantial and this probably reflects the extreme sensitivity of the COV calculation to even a few different cell area values. This poor agreement needs to be considered in any comparative studies.
Authors: Thatiane Lima Sampaio; Isabela Pereira Rodrigues; Micheline Borges Lucas Cresta; Anna Cláudia de Oliveira Queiroz; Thayssa Neiva da Fonseca Victer; Daniela Ferreira Salomão Pontes; Wildo Navegantes de Araújo; Sônia Nair Báo; Maria Regina Catai Chalita Journal: Cell Tissue Bank Date: 2020-11-09 Impact factor: 1.522
Authors: Hidetaka Miyagi; Amelia A Stanley; Tanvi J Chokshi; Carina Y Pasqualino; Alyssa L Hoehn; Christopher J Murphy; Sara M Thomasy Journal: Vet Ophthalmol Date: 2019-06-09 Impact factor: 1.444
Authors: Juan P Vigueras-Guillén; Jeroen van Rooij; Angela Engel; Hans G Lemij; Lucas J van Vliet; Koenraad A Vermeer Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2020-08-21 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Haya Matuoq Al Farhan; Wafa'a Majed Al Otaibi; Hanouf Mohammed Al Razqan; Alanoud Abdullah Al Harqan Journal: BMC Ophthalmol Date: 2013-11-25 Impact factor: 2.209