Suppr超能文献

在存在角膜小滴的情况下角膜内皮细胞分析的中心法与Flex-Center法的比较

Comparison of the Center and Flex-Center Methods of Corneal Endothelial Cell Analysis in the Presence of Guttae.

作者信息

Huang Jianyan, Liu Xuan, Tepelus Tudor C, Nazikyan Tigran, Chopra Vikas, Sadda Srinivas R, Lee Olivia L

机构信息

*Doheny Eye Institute, Los Angeles, CA; †Department of Ophthalmology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA; and ‡Department of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, Medical Center, Tsinghua University, Tiantongyuan Area, Changping District, Beijing, China.

出版信息

Cornea. 2017 Dec;36(12):1514-1520. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000001334.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare endothelial cell analysis by the center and flex-center methods in corneas with guttae of differing severity and to determine the minimum countable cell number for using only the flex-center method.

METHODS

Forty-seven eyes with corneal guttae and 50 age-matched normal controls were enrolled in the study. Three images were captured in each central cornea with the noncontact specular microscope. Endothelial cell density (ECD), coefficient of variation (CV), and percentage of hexagonal cells (HEX) were analyzed by trained graders, using both center and flex-center methods.

RESULTS

Consistent ECD and HEX values were obtained in normal eyes by both methods (P > 0.05). In corneas with guttae, ECD values obtained by the center method were 2.4% higher than those obtained with the flex-center method (P < 0.001). ECD values derived by both methods disagreed only when <30 cells were identified or <20 cells were analyzed. CV values obtained by the center method were 17.1% (P < 0.001) lower than those obtained by the flex-center method. HEX values obtained with both methods (P > 0.05) agreed. Regardless of guttae density, the ECD, CV, and HEX values of 3 images of each eye were in agreement (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In corneas with guttae, both center and flex-center methods can reliably determine ECD. Although current practice recommends the center method when at least 100 cells can be counted, our study suggests that the center method can provide a reliable ECD value when there are ≥30 contiguous countable cells in a central cornea endothelial image. The flex-center method is recommended when <30 contiguous cells are identified.

摘要

目的

比较中心法和弹性中心法对不同严重程度角膜滴状病变角膜内皮细胞的分析,并确定仅使用弹性中心法时的最小可计数细胞数。

方法

47只患有角膜滴状病变的眼睛和50只年龄匹配的正常对照眼睛纳入本研究。使用非接触式角膜内皮显微镜在每个中央角膜采集三张图像。由经过培训的分级人员使用中心法和弹性中心法分析内皮细胞密度(ECD)、变异系数(CV)和六角形细胞百分比(HEX)。

结果

两种方法在正常眼睛中获得的ECD和HEX值一致(P>0.05)。在有角膜滴状病变的角膜中,中心法获得的ECD值比弹性中心法高2.4%(P<0.001)。仅当识别出的细胞少于30个或分析的细胞少于20个时,两种方法得出的ECD值才不一致。中心法获得的CV值比弹性中心法低17.1%(P<0.001)。两种方法获得的HEX值一致(P>0.05)。无论角膜滴状病变密度如何,每只眼睛三张图像的ECD、CV和HEX值均一致(P>0.05)。

结论

在有角膜滴状病变的角膜中,中心法和弹性中心法均可可靠地测定ECD。尽管目前的做法建议当至少可计数100个细胞时采用中心法,但我们的研究表明,当中央角膜内皮图像中有≥30个连续可计数细胞时,中心法可提供可靠的ECD值。当识别出的连续细胞少于30个时,建议采用弹性中心法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验