BACKGROUND: The recent availability of genetic analyses has demonstrated the shortcomings of the current phenotypic method of corneal dystrophy classification. Abnormalities in different genes can cause a single phenotype, whereas different defects in a single gene can cause different phenotypes. Some disorders termed corneal dystrophies do not appear to have a genetic basis. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop a new classification system for corneal dystrophies, integrating up-to-date information on phenotypic description, pathologic examination, and genetic analysis. METHODS: The International Committee for Classification of Corneal Dystrophies (IC3D) was created to devise a current and accurate nomenclature. RESULTS: This anatomic classification continues to organize dystrophies according to the level chiefly affected. Each dystrophy has a template summarizing genetic, clinical, and pathologic information. A category number from 1 through 4 is assigned, reflecting the level of evidence supporting the existence of a given dystrophy. The most defined dystrophies belong to category 1 (a well-defined corneal dystrophy in which a gene has been mapped and identified and specific mutations are known) and the least defined belong to category 4 (a suspected dystrophy where the clinical and genetic evidence is not yet convincing). The nomenclature may be updated over time as new information regarding the dystrophies becomes available. CONCLUSIONS: The IC3D Classification of Corneal Dystrophies is a new classification system that incorporates many aspects of the traditional definitions of corneal dystrophies with new genetic, clinical, and pathologic information. Standardized templates provide key information that includes a level of evidence for there being a corneal dystrophy. The system is user-friendly and upgradeable and can be retrieved on the website www.corneasociety.org/ic3d.
BACKGROUND: The recent availability of genetic analyses has demonstrated the shortcomings of the current phenotypic method of corneal dystrophy classification. Abnormalities in different genes can cause a single phenotype, whereas different defects in a single gene can cause different phenotypes. Some disorders termed corneal dystrophies do not appear to have a genetic basis. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop a new classification system for corneal dystrophies, integrating up-to-date information on phenotypic description, pathologic examination, and genetic analysis. METHODS: The International Committee for Classification of Corneal Dystrophies (IC3D) was created to devise a current and accurate nomenclature. RESULTS: This anatomic classification continues to organize dystrophies according to the level chiefly affected. Each dystrophy has a template summarizing genetic, clinical, and pathologic information. A category number from 1 through 4 is assigned, reflecting the level of evidence supporting the existence of a given dystrophy. The most defined dystrophies belong to category 1 (a well-defined corneal dystrophy in which a gene has been mapped and identified and specific mutations are known) and the least defined belong to category 4 (a suspected dystrophy where the clinical and genetic evidence is not yet convincing). The nomenclature may be updated over time as new information regarding the dystrophies becomes available. CONCLUSIONS: The IC3D Classification of Corneal Dystrophies is a new classification system that incorporates many aspects of the traditional definitions of corneal dystrophies with new genetic, clinical, and pathologic information. Standardized templates provide key information that includes a level of evidence for there being a corneal dystrophy. The system is user-friendly and upgradeable and can be retrieved on the website www.corneasociety.org/ic3d.
Authors: G Tasa; J Kals; K Muru; E Juronen; A Piirsoo; S Veromann; S Jänes; A V Mikelsaar; A Lang Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: S Biswas; F L Munier; J Yardley; N Hart-Holden; R Perveen; P Cousin; J E Sutphin; B Noble; M Batterbury; C Kielty; A Hackett; R Bonshek; A Ridgway; D McLeod; V C Sheffield; E M Stone; D F Schorderet; G C Black Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 2001-10-01 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: S G Johansson; J O Hourihane; J Bousquet; C Bruijnzeel-Koomen; S Dreborg; T Haahtela; M L Kowalski; N Mygind; J Ring; P van Cauwenberge; M van Hage-Hamsten; B Wüthrich Journal: Allergy Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: P Dighiero; F Niel; P Ellies; F D'Hermies; M Savoldelli; G Renard; M Delpech; S Valleix Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Mohamed F El-Ashry; Mai M Abd El-Aziz; Simon Wilkins; Michael E Cheetham; Susan E Wilkie; Alison J Hardcastle; Stephanie Halford; Ahmed Y Bayoumi; Linda A Ficker; Stephen Tuft; Shomi S Bhattacharya; Neil D Ebenezer Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Nicole Arnold-Wörner; David Goldblum; André R Miserez; Josef Flammer; Peter Meyer Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Andrea L Vincent; David M Markie; Betina De Karolyi; Catherine E Wheeldon; Dipika V Patel; Christina N Grupcheva; Charles N J McGhee Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2009-08-26 Impact factor: 2.367