College of Optometry, University of Houston, 505 J. Davis Armistead Building, Houston, TX 77204, USA.
Exp Eye Res. 2011 Nov;93(5):741-52. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2011.09.008. Epub 2011 Sep 24.
There is considerable interest in determining lens volume in the living eye. Lens volume is of interest to understand accommodative changes in the lens and to size accommodative IOLs (A-IOLs) to fit the capsular bag. Some studies have suggested lens volume change during accommodation. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is the only method available to determine lens volume in vivo. MRI is, by its nature, relatively low in temporal and spatial resolution. Therefore analysis often requires determining lens volume from single image slices with relatively low resolution on which only simple image analysis methods can be used and without repeated measures. In this study, 7 T MRI scans encompassing the full lens volume were performed on 19 enucleated pig eyes. The eyes were then dissected to isolate and photograph the lens in profile and the lens volumes were measured empirically using a fluid displacement method. Lens volumes were calculated from two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) MR and 2D photographic profile images of the isolated lenses using several different analysis methods. Image based and actual measured lens volumes were compared. The average image-based volume of all lenses varied from the average measured volume of all lenses by 0.6%-6.4% depending on the image analysis method. Image analysis methods that use gradient based edge detection showed higher precision with actual volumes (r(2): 0.957-0.990), while threshold based segmentation had poorer correlations (r(2): 0.759-0.828). The root-mean-square (RMS) difference between image analysis based volumes and fluid displacement measured volumes ranged from 8.51 μl to 25.79 μl. This provides an estimate of the error of previously published methods used to calculate lens volume. Immobilized, enucleated porcine eyes permit improved MR image resolution relative to living eyes and therefore improved image analysis methods to calculate lens volume. The results show that some of the accommodative changes in lens volume reported in the literature are likely below the resolution limits of imaging methods used. MRI, even with detailed image analysis methods used here, is unlikely to achieve the resolution required to accurately size an A-IOL to the capsular bag.
人们对活体眼睛中晶状体体积的测定非常感兴趣。晶状体体积对于理解晶状体的调节变化以及为适应囊袋而设计调节型人工晶状体(A-IOL)的大小非常重要。一些研究表明晶状体在调节过程中会发生体积变化。磁共振成像(MRI)是目前唯一可活体测量晶状体体积的方法。MRI 的时间和空间分辨率相对较低,这一特性限制了其应用。因此,分析通常需要从分辨率相对较低的单个图像切片上确定晶状体体积,而且这些切片只能使用简单的图像分析方法,且无法进行重复测量。在这项研究中,对 19 只猪眼进行了 7T MRI 扫描,以涵盖整个晶状体体积。然后将眼球解剖,分离并对晶状体进行轮廓摄影,使用流体置换法对晶状体体积进行实际测量。使用几种不同的分析方法,从晶状体的二维(2D)和三维(3D)MRI 及二维摄影轮廓图像计算晶状体体积。比较了基于图像和实际测量的晶状体体积。基于图像的所有晶状体平均体积与所有晶状体的实际平均体积相差 0.6%-6.4%,具体取决于图像分析方法。使用基于梯度的边缘检测的图像分析方法与实际体积具有更高的精度(r(2):0.957-0.990),而基于阈值的分割方法相关性较差(r(2):0.759-0.828)。基于图像分析的体积与流体置换法测量体积之间的均方根(RMS)差异范围为 8.51μl 至 25.79μl。这提供了对以前用于计算晶状体体积的方法的误差估计。与活体眼睛相比,固定的猪眼可提高 MRI 图像分辨率,从而改善用于计算晶状体体积的图像分析方法。研究结果表明,文献中报道的一些晶状体体积的调节变化可能低于所用成像方法的分辨率极限。即使使用这里详细的图像分析方法,MRI 也不太可能达到准确设计适应囊袋的 A-IOL 所需的分辨率。