Literature DB >> 31179615

Comparison of automated vs manual analysis of corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in normal and corneal endothelial dystrophy-affected dogs.

Hidetaka Miyagi1,2, Amelia A Stanley1, Tanvi J Chokshi1, Carina Y Pasqualino1, Alyssa L Hoehn1, Christopher J Murphy1,3, Sara M Thomasy1,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of automated imaging software of the Nidek ConfoScan 4 confocal biomicroscope at analyzing canine corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in health and disease, by comparing to a manual analysis method. ANIMAL STUDIED: Nineteen eyes of 10 dogs were evaluated and include three Beagles, three Jack Russell Terriers, and four miscellaneous breeds. Twelve clinically normal and seven eyes affected with corneal endothelial dystrophy (CED) were scanned and analyzed. PROCEDURES: Endothelial cell density (ECD), mean and standard deviation (SD) of cell area, percent polymegathism, mean and SD of the number of cell sides, and percent pleomorphism were calculated using automated and manual methods for each scan.
RESULTS: The automated analysis showed significantly greater ECD in comparison with the manual frame method due to misidentification of cell domains in CED-affected dogs. No significant differences in ECD were observed between normal and CED-affected dogs in automated analysis, while CED-affected dogs showed significantly lower ECD in manual frame method and planimetry. Using both automated and manual methods, CED-affected dogs showed greater variability of cell area or the number of cell sides than normal dogs.
CONCLUSION: The automated imaging software is unable to accurately identify cell borders in CED-affected dogs resulting in inaccurate estimates of ECD. Thus, manual analysis is recommended for use in clinical trials assessing adverse events associated with novel medical treatments and/or surgical procedures.
© 2019 American College of Veterinary Ophthalmologists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Nidek ConfoScan 4; corneal endothelial dystrophy; dog; endothelial cell density; manual analysis; navis automated software

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31179615      PMCID: PMC6900456          DOI: 10.1111/vop.12682

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Ophthalmol        ISSN: 1463-5216            Impact factor:   1.444


  27 in total

1.  Reliability and reproducibility of corneal endothelial image analysis by in vivo confocal microscopy.

Authors:  L Imre; A Nagymihály
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Comparison of endothelial cell count using confocal and contact specular microscopy.

Authors:  Christina M C Klais; Jens Bühren; Thomas Kohnen
Journal:  Ophthalmologica       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.250

3.  In vivo confocal microscopy of the corneal endothelium: comparison of three morphometry methods after corneal transplantation.

Authors:  S Jonuscheit; M J Doughty; K Ramaesh
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-06-10       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Comparison of Noncontact Specular and Confocal Microscopy for Evaluation of Corneal Endothelium.

Authors:  Jianyan Huang; Jyotsna Maram; Tudor C Tepelus; Srinivas R Sadda; Vikas Chopra; Olivia L Lee
Journal:  Eye Contact Lens       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 2.018

5.  Superficial Keratectomy and Conjunctival Advancement Hood Flap (SKCAHF) for the Management of Bullous Keratopathy: Validation in Dogs With Spontaneous Disease.

Authors:  Taemi Horikawa; Sara M Thomasy; Amelia A Stanley; Allison S Calderon; Jennifer Li; Lana L Linton; Christopher J Murphy
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.651

6.  In vivo confocal microscopy in the normal corneas of cats, dogs and birds.

Authors:  Christiane Kafarnik; Jens Fritsche; Sven Reese
Journal:  Vet Ophthalmol       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.644

7.  Phenotypic Characterization of Corneal Endothelial Dystrophy in German Shorthaired and Wirehaired Pointers Using In Vivo Advanced Corneal Imaging and Histopathology.

Authors:  Olivia R Shull; Christopher M Reilly; Lola B Davis; Christopher J Murphy; Sara M Thomasy
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 2.651

8.  Corneal endothelial changes in diabetic dogs.

Authors:  R W Yee; M Matsuda; T S Kern; R L Engerman; H F Edelhauser
Journal:  Curr Eye Res       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 2.424

9.  Fully automatic evaluation of the corneal endothelium from in vivo confocal microscopy.

Authors:  Bettina Selig; Koenraad A Vermeer; Bernd Rieger; Toine Hillenaar; Cris L Luengo Hendriks
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2015-04-26       Impact factor: 1.930

10.  In Vivo Imaging of Corneal Endothelial Dystrophy in Boston Terriers: A Spontaneous, Canine Model for Fuchs' Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy.

Authors:  Sara M Thomasy; Dennis E Cortes; Alyssa L Hoehn; Allison C Calderon; Jennifer Y Li; Christopher J Murphy
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 4.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.