Abstract
Purpose: :
To compare CONFOSCAN 2 (Nidek Technologies,Inc. Greensboro NC.) and HRT II with the Rostock Cornea Module ( Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Dossenheim, Germany) in evaluating corneal endothelial cell density and manual count intra–operator variability.
Methods: :
20 normal eyes of 10 different patients (mean age: 23 years, range 20–26, 7 female and 3 male), were analyzed. An evaluation of the central cornea endothelial cell density was performed on the same day and by the same operator in a randomized sequence using CONFOSCAN 2 and HRT II with the Rostock Cornea Module in a manual mode. Manual count intra–operator variability was assessed on images of the same patient obtained by the same operator every hour from 8.00 a.m. to 6 p.m. (ten times). To assess the endothelial cell density and the intra–operator variability, comparable ROIs (Region of Interest) and number of counted cells were analyzed.
Results: :
Manual cell count intra–operator variability was very low (mean of ten measurements 3160,5 ± 40.3 sd with HRT II with the Rostock Cornea Module and average 3260,5 ± 40.5 sd with CONFOSCAN 2 ). Mean endothelial cell density obtained with CONFUSCAN 2 was 3007,75± 382.3 cells/mm2 and by HRT II with the Rostock Cornea Module was 2921,05±316.2 cells/mm2. The difference between the two measures was not statistically significant (p<0.3 t test).
Discussion: :
The results show no significant differences in the cell count of central cornea endothelial cells performed with CONFOSCAN 2 and HRT II with the Rostock Cornea Module. and a good reproducibility of manual cell count with both procedures.
Keywords: cornea: endothelium • imaging methods (CT, FA, ICG, MRI, OCT, RTA, SLO, ultrasound)