用于角膜供体研究图像中供体内皮细胞密度测定的镜面显微镜辅助研究方法。
Specular microscopy ancillary study methods for donor endothelial cell density determination of Cornea Donor Study images.
作者信息
Benetz Beth Ann, Gal Robin L, Ruedy Katrina J, Rice Carmella, Beck Roy W, Kalajian Andrea D, Lass Jonathan H
机构信息
Specular Microscopy Reading Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
出版信息
Curr Eye Res. 2006 Apr;31(4):319-27. doi: 10.1080/02713680500536738.
PURPOSE
To describe reliable methods for determining central corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) in a multicenter eye bank study.
METHODS
The Specular Microscopy Reading Center utilized a dual-grading procedure and adjudication process to classify image quality and determine ECD for a subset of donor endothelial images obtained in the Specular Microscopy Ancillary Study, which is part of the Cornea Donor Study. Two certified readers classified images as analyzable (excellent, good, fair) or unanalyzable and determined the ECD using a variable frame technique. An adjudicator also evaluated the images if quality classifications by the two readers differed by one grade, if any reader found the image unanalyzable, and/or if the ECD determination between the two readers was >or= 5%.
RESULTS
Image quality categorization by the two readers was identical for 441 (64%) of 688 donor images. The ECD differed by < 5% for 442 (69%) of the 645 analyzable images. The ECD determined by the adjudicator was < 5% different than the ECD determined by at least one reader for 193 (95%) of the 203 remaining images.
CONCLUSIONS
The dual-grading and adjudication procedures produce reliable, reproducible assessments of image quality and ECD. The importance of two independent readings is evident in that image quality ratings differed between the two readers by one grade in 36% of all images and ECD counts differed by >or=5% for 31% of analyzable images.
目的
描述在一项多中心眼库研究中确定中央角膜内皮细胞密度（ECD）的可靠方法。
方法
镜面显微镜阅读中心采用双重分级程序和裁决流程，对在角膜供体研究的一部分——镜面显微镜辅助研究中获得的供体内皮图像子集进行图像质量分类并确定ECD。两名经过认证的阅片者将图像分类为可分析（优秀、良好、一般）或不可分析，并使用可变框架技术确定ECD。如果两名阅片者的质量分类相差一个等级、如果任何一名阅片者发现图像不可分析，和/或如果两名阅片者之间的ECD测定相差≥5%，裁决者也会对图像进行评估。
结果
688张供体图像中，441张（64%）的两名阅片者图像质量分类相同。645张可分析图像中，442张（69%）的ECD相差<5%。对于其余203张图像中的193张（95%），裁决者确定的ECD与至少一名阅片者确定的ECD相差<5%。
结论
双重分级和裁决程序对图像质量和ECD产生可靠、可重复的评估。两次独立阅片的重要性显而易见，因为在所有图像中，36%的图像两名阅片者的图像质量评级相差一个等级，在可分析图像中，31%的图像ECD计数相差≥5%。
Zotero 插件