Corneal Endothelial Microscopy: Does a Manual Recognition of the Endothelial Cells Help the Morphometric Analysis Compared to a Fully Automatic Approach?

Q2 Medicine
Giulia Carlotta Rizzo, Rosa Di Grassi, Erika Ponzini, Silvia Tavazzi, Fabrizio Zeri
{"title":"Corneal Endothelial Microscopy: Does a Manual Recognition of the Endothelial Cells Help the Morphometric Analysis Compared to a Fully Automatic Approach?","authors":"Giulia Carlotta Rizzo, Rosa Di Grassi, Erika Ponzini, Silvia Tavazzi, Fabrizio Zeri","doi":"10.3390/vision8040064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated whether manual integration in the recognition of the endothelial cells produces different outcomes of morphometric parameters compared to a fully automatic approach. Eight hundred and ninety endothelial images, originally acquired by the Perseus Specular Microscope (CSO, Florence, Italy), from seven positions of right and left corneas were selected from the database of the Research Centre in Optics and Optometry at the University of Milano-Bicocca. For each image selected, two procedures of cell identification were performed by the Perseus: an automatic identification and a manual-integrated procedure to add potential additional cells with the available editing tool. At the end of both procedures, the endothelial cell density (ECD), coefficient of variation (CV), and hexagonality (HEX) of the mosaic were calculated. The HEX in the two procedures was significantly different for all comparisons (<i>p</i> < 0.001), but clinically negligible. No significant differences were found for the CV and ECD in the images of both eyes irrespective of the corneal position of acquisition (except for ECD in three corneal portions, <i>p</i> < 0.05). To conclude, it is possible to recognise a significantly higher number of cells using the manual-integrated procedure than it is using the fully automatic one, but this does not change the morphological parameters achieved.</p>","PeriodicalId":36586,"journal":{"name":"Vision (Switzerland)","volume":"8 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11587443/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision (Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vision8040064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigated whether manual integration in the recognition of the endothelial cells produces different outcomes of morphometric parameters compared to a fully automatic approach. Eight hundred and ninety endothelial images, originally acquired by the Perseus Specular Microscope (CSO, Florence, Italy), from seven positions of right and left corneas were selected from the database of the Research Centre in Optics and Optometry at the University of Milano-Bicocca. For each image selected, two procedures of cell identification were performed by the Perseus: an automatic identification and a manual-integrated procedure to add potential additional cells with the available editing tool. At the end of both procedures, the endothelial cell density (ECD), coefficient of variation (CV), and hexagonality (HEX) of the mosaic were calculated. The HEX in the two procedures was significantly different for all comparisons (p < 0.001), but clinically negligible. No significant differences were found for the CV and ECD in the images of both eyes irrespective of the corneal position of acquisition (except for ECD in three corneal portions, p < 0.05). To conclude, it is possible to recognise a significantly higher number of cells using the manual-integrated procedure than it is using the fully automatic one, but this does not change the morphological parameters achieved.

角膜内皮显微镜:与全自动方法相比,手动识别内皮细胞是否有助于形态计量分析?
本研究探讨了人工识别内皮细胞是否会产生与全自动方法不同的形态参数结果。研究人员从米兰比可卡大学光学和验光研究中心的数据库中选取了 890 张内皮细胞图像,这些图像最初是由 Perseus 镜(CSO,意大利佛罗伦萨)从左右角膜的七个位置采集的。对于所选的每张图像,Perseus 都进行了两种细胞识别程序:自动识别和手动整合程序,利用可用的编辑工具添加潜在的额外细胞。两个程序结束后,都会计算内皮细胞密度(ECD)、变异系数(CV)和马赛克的六边形度(HEX)。两种方法的 HEX 在所有比较中都有显著差异(P < 0.001),但在临床上可以忽略不计。无论采集角膜的位置如何,双眼图像的 CV 和 ECD 均无明显差异(三个角膜部分的 ECD 除外,P < 0.05)。总之,使用人工整合程序识别的细胞数量明显高于使用全自动程序识别的细胞数量,但这并不会改变所获得的形态参数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Vision (Switzerland)
Vision (Switzerland) Health Professions-Optometry
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信