Further analysis of assessments of the coefficient of variation of corneal endothelial cell areas from specular microscopic images

REFERENCES

• Doughty MJ. Towards a quantitative analysis of corneal endothelial cell morphology: a review of techniques and their application. Optom Vis Sci 1989; 66: 626–642.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edelhauser HF. The resiliency of the corneal endothelium to refractive and intraocular surgery. Cornea 2000; 19: 263–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourne WM, Mclaren JW. Clinical responses of the corneal endothelium. Exp Eye Res 2004; 78: 561–572.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amon M, Grasl MM, Scheidel W, Schranz R, Skorpik ch. Bestimmung der präoperativen zentralen Endothelzelldichte von Spenderhornhäuten: Kritischer Vergleich zweier Methoden. Spektrum Augenheilkd 1988; 2: 245–248.
   Google Scholar
• Siertsema JV, Landesz M, Van den brom H, Van rij G. Automated video image morphometry of the corneal endothelium. Doc Ophthalmol 1993; 85: 35–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landesz M, Siertsema JV, Van rij G. Comparative study of three semiautomated specular microscopes. J Cataract Refract Surg 1995; 21: 409–416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landesz M, Kamps A, Slart R, Siertsema JV, Van rij G. Morphometric analysis of the corneal endothelium with three different specular microscopes. Doc Ophthalmol 1995; 90: 15–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vecchi M, Braccio L, Orsoni JG. The Topcon SP 1000 and Image‐NET systems. A comparison of four methods for evaluating corneal endothelial cell density. Cornea 1996; 15: 271–277.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seitz B, Müller EE, Langenbucher A, Kus MM, Naumann GOH. Endotheliale Keratopathie bei Pseudoexfoliationssyndrome: Quantitative und qualitative Morphometrie mittels automisierter Videobildanalyse. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 1995; 207: 167–175.
   Google Scholar
• Seitz B, Müller EE, Langenbucher A, Kus MM. Reproduzierbarkeit und Validität eines neuen automatisierten Verfahrens der spiegelmikroskopischen Hornhautendothelanalyse. Ophthalmologe 1997; 94: 127–135.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung S‐W, Cho P. Endothelial cell analysis using the Topcon SP‐1000 non‐contact specular microscope and IMAGEnet system. Clin Exp Optom 1998; 81: 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung SW, Cho P. Endothelial cell analysis with the TOPCON specular microscope SP‐2000P and IMAGEnet system. Curr Eye Res 2000; 21: 788–798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benetz BAM, Diaconu E, Bowlin SJ, Oak SS, Laing RA, Lass JH. Comparison of corneal endothelial image analysis by Konan SP8000 noncontact and Bio‐Optics Bambi systems. Cornea 1999; 18: 67–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohno K, Nelson LR, Mclaren JW, Hodge DO, Bourne WM. Comparison of recording systems and analysis methods in specular microscopy. Cornea 1999; 18: 416–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isager P, Hjortdal JO, Guo S, Ehlers N. Comparison of endothelial cell density estimated by contact and non‐contact specular microscopy. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2000; 78: 42–44.
   Google Scholar
• Imre L, Nagymihaly A. Reliability and reproducibility of corneal endothelial image analysis by in vivo confocal microscopy. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2001; 239: 356–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snellingen T, Gullapalli GN, Shrestha JK, Huq F, Cheng H. Quantitative and morphological characteristics of human corneal endothelium in relation to age, gender and ethnicity in cataract populations of south Asia. Cornea 2001; 20: 55–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins MJ, Carr JD, Stulting RD, Azar R, Waring GO, Smith RE, Thompson KP, Edelhauser HF. Effects of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) on the corneal endothelium 3 years postoperatively. Am J Ophthalmol 2001; 131: 1–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Módis L, Langenbucher A, Seitz B. Corneal endothelial cell density and pachymetry measured by contact and noncontact specular microscopy. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 1763–1769.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nichols JJ, Kosunick GM, Bullimore MA. Reliability of corneal thickness and endothelial cell density measures. J Refract Surg 2003; 19: 344–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hara M, Morishige N, Chikama T‐I, NishidaT. Comparison of confocal biomicroscopy and non‐contact specular microscopy for evaluation of the corneal endothelium. Cornea 2003; 22: 512–515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klais CMC, Bühren J, Kohnen T. Comparison of endothelial cell count using confocal and contact specular miscoscopy. Ophthalmologica 2003; 217: 99–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitzmann AS, Winter EJ, Nau CB, Mclaren JW, Hodge DO, Bourne WM. Comparison of corneal endothelial cell images from a non‐contact specular microscope and a scanning confocal microscope. Cornea 2005; 24: 980–984.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van schaick W, Van dooren BTH, Mulder PGH, Völker‐dieben MJM. Validity of endothelial cell analysis methods and recommendations for calibration in Topcon SP‐2000P specular microscopy. Cornea 2005; 24: 538–544.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giasson CJ, Graham A, Blouin J‐F, Solomon L, Gresset J, Melillo M, Polse KA. Morphometry of cells and guttae in subjects with normal or gutte endothelium with a contour detection algorithm. Eye Contact Lens 2005; 31: 158–165.
   Google Scholar
• De sanctis U, Machetta F, Razzano L, Dalmasso P, Grignolo FM. Corneal endothelium evaluation with 2 noncontact specular miscroscopes and their semiautomated methods of analysis. Cornea 2006; 25: 501–506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prinz A, Varga J, Findl O. Reliability of a video‐based noncontact specular microscope for assessing the corneal endothelium. Cornea 2007; 26: 924–929.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirneiss C, Schumann RG, Gruterich M, Welge‐luessen UC, Kampik A, Neubauer AS. Endothelial cell density in donor corneas. A comparison of automatic software programs with manual counting. Cornea 2007; 26: 80–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thuret G, Deb‐joardar N, Manissolle C, Zhao M, Peoch M, Gain P, Gavet Y. Assessment of the human corneal endothelium: in vivo Topcon SP2000P specular microscope versus ex vivo sambacornea eye bank analyser. Br J Ophthalmol 2007; 91: 265–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loukotová V, Hlinomazová Z, Horáčková M, Vlková E. Metody analyzy endoteliální mikroskovie. Ces Slov Oftal 2007; 63: 185–192.
   Google Scholar
• Stefansson A, Muller O, Sundmacher R. Non‐contact specular microscopy of the normal corneal endothelium. A statistical evaluation of morphometric parameters. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1982; 218: 200–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadachi R, Nunokawa K. Automated corneal endothelial cell analysis. Proc 5th Annual IEEE Symp Computerised Medical Systems (Durham, NC), 1992; 450–457.
   Google Scholar
• Tagawa H, Kado M, Okada A, Furukawa H. Property and clinical availability of the noncontact autofocus specular microscope [in Japanese. J Jpn Ophthalmol Soc 1994; 98: 772–776.
   Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical measures for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measures. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doughty MJ, Fonn D, Nguyen KT. Assessment of the reliability of calculations of coefficient of variation for normal and polymegethous human corneal endothelium. Optom Vis Sci 1993; 70: 759–770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doughty MJ. The ambiguous coefficient of variation: Polymegethism of the corneal endothelium and central corneal thickness. ICLC 1990;17: 240–247.
   Google Scholar
• Oblak E, Doughty MJ, Oblak L. A semi‐automated assessment of cell size and shape in monolayers, with optional adjustment for cell border width—application to human corneal endothelium. Tissue Cell 2002; 34: 283–295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doughty MJ. Could the coefficient of variation (COV) of the corneal endothelium be overestimated when a centre‐dot method is used? Clin Exp Optom 2008; 91: 103–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doughty MJ. Prevalence of ‘non‐hexagonal’ cells in the corneal endothelium of young Caucasian adults, and their inter‐relationships. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1998; 18: 415–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gain P, Thuret G, Kodjikian L, Gavet Y, Turc PH, Theillere C, Acquart S, Le petit JC, Maugery J, Campos L. Automated tri‐image analysis of stored corneal endothelium. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 801–808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doughty MJ, Aakre BM. Central versus paracentral endothelial cell density values in relation to duration of soft contact lens wear. Eye Contact Lens 2007; 33: 180–184.
   Google Scholar