科南SP8000非接触式系统与生物光学Bambi系统对角膜内皮图像分析的比较。

Comparison of corneal endothelial image analysis by Konan SP8000 noncontact and Bio-Optics Bambi systems.

作者信息

Benetz B A, Diaconu E, Bowlin S J, Oak S S, Laing R A, Lass J H

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals of Cleveland, Ohio 44106-5068, USA.

出版信息

Cornea. 1999 Jan;18(1):67-72.

PMID:9894940

Abstract

PURPOSE

Compare corneal endothelial image analysis by Konan SP8000 and Bio-Optics Bambi image-analysis systems.

METHODS

Corneal endothelial images from 98 individuals (191 eyes), ranging in age from 4 to 87 years, with a normal slit-lamp examination and no history of ocular trauma, intraocular surgery, or intraocular inflammation were obtained by the Konan SP8000 noncontact specular microscope. One observer analyzed these images by using the Konan system and a second observer by using the Bio-Optics Bambi system. Three methods of analyses were used: a fixed-frame method to obtain cell density (for both Konan and Bio-Optics Bambi) and a "dot" (Konan) or "corners" (Bio-Optics Bambi) method to determine morphometric parameters.

RESULTS

The cell density determined by the Konan fixed-frame method was significantly higher (157 cells/mm2) than the Bio-Optics Bambi fixed-frame method determination (p<0.0001). However, the difference in cell density, although still statistically significant, was smaller and reversed comparing the Konan fixed-frame method with both Konan dot and Bio-Optics Bambi comers method (-74 cells/mm2, p<0.0001; -55 cells/mm2, p<0.0001, respectively). Small but statistically significant morphometric analyses differences between Konan and Bio-Optics Bambi were seen: cell density, +19 cells/mm2 (p = 0.03); cell area, -3.0 microm2 (p = 0.008); and coefficient of variation, +1.0 (p = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference between these two methods in the percentage of six-sided cells detected (p = 0.55).

CONCLUSION

Cell densities measured by the Konan fixed-frame method were comparable with Konan and Bio-Optics Bambi's morphometric analysis, but not with the Bio-Optics Bambi fixed-frame method. The two morphometric analyses were comparable with minimal or no differences for the parameters that were studied. The Konan SP8000 endothelial image-analysis system may be useful for large-scale clinical trials determining cell loss; its noncontact system has many clinical benefits (including patient comfort, safety, ease of use, and short procedure time) and provides reliable cell-density calculations.

摘要

目的

比较科南SP8000和生物光学班比图像分析系统对角膜内皮的图像分析。

方法

通过科南SP8000非接触式角膜内皮显微镜，获取98名年龄在4至87岁之间、裂隙灯检查正常且无眼外伤、眼内手术或眼内炎症史的个体（191只眼）的角膜内皮图像。一名观察者使用科南系统分析这些图像，另一名观察者使用生物光学班比系统分析。采用了三种分析方法：一种固定框架法获取细胞密度（用于科南和生物光学班比），以及一种“点”（科南）或“角”（生物光学班比）法确定形态学参数。

结果

科南固定框架法测定的细胞密度（157个细胞/mm²）显著高于生物光学班比固定框架法测定的结果（p<0.0001）。然而，细胞密度的差异虽然仍具有统计学意义，但在将科南固定框架法与科南点法和生物光学班比角法进行比较时变小且逆转（分别为-74个细胞/mm²，p<0.0001；-55个细胞/mm²，p<0.0001）。科南和生物光学班比之间在形态学分析上存在小但具有统计学意义的差异：细胞密度，+19个细胞/mm²（p = 0.03）；细胞面积，-3.0平方微米（p = 0.008）；变异系数，+1.0（p = 0.003）。在检测到的六边形细胞百分比方面，这两种方法之间没有统计学意义上的差异（p = 0.55）。

结论

科南固定框架法测量的细胞密度与科南和生物光学班比的形态学分析结果相当，但与生物光学班比固定框架法不同。两种形态学分析对于所研究的参数具有可比性，差异极小或无差异。科南SP8000角膜内皮图像分析系统可能有助于确定细胞丢失情况的大规模临床试验；其非接触系统具有许多临床益处（包括患者舒适度、安全性、易用性和操作时间短），并能提供可靠的细胞密度计算。