Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Two single descriptors of endothelial polymegethism and pleomorphism

  • Cornea
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compute two new quantitative parameters that directly reflect the level of polymegethism and pleomorphism using data provided by a non-contact specular microscope.

Methods

We examined right eyes of 306 voluntaries (102 males, 204 females) whose ages ranged from 6 to 82 years (mean ± SD, 44 ± 22 years). Endothelial cell density (ECD), average cell size (ACS), standard error of cells surface (SEM), coefficient of variation in cell size (CV) and hexagonality index (HI) were obtained. In addition, two new indices of polymegethism (POLi) and pleomorphism (PLEi) were derived using weighted linear combinations of data obtained from instrument classification of endothelial cells based on the individual counts of cells by size and number of sides respectively, as provided by the instrument. Values of POLi and PLEi were compared between a group of diabetic patients and a group of age-matched controls.

Results

Average values of POLi and PLEi were 10.47 ± 3.94 and 8.36 ± 1.21 respectively. POLi and PLEi display high correlation with SEM (r = 0.911, r = 0.664), ECD (r = −0.997, r = −0.585), ACS (r = 0.997, r = 0.441), ACS (SD) (r = 0.883, r = 0.682), CV (r = 0.301, r = 0.712) and HI (r = −0.437, r = −0.991); all these correlations were highly significant (p < 0.001). POLi and PLEi also showed significant positive correlations with age (r = 0.765, p < 0.001 and r = 0.428, p < 0.001 respectively). POLi was significantly higher in a group of diabetic patients when compared with another group of age-matched controls (p = 0.001).

Conclusions

Two single quantitative parameters of endothelial polymegethism and pleomorphism (POLi and PLEi respectively) have been derived from the data obtained with a commercial non-contact specular microscope. These parameters have been demonstrated to identify differences between the corneal endothelium of diabetic and non-diabetic patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. O’Neal MR, Polse KA (1986) Decreased endothelial pump function with aging. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 27:457–463

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Doughty MJ (1989) Toward a quantitative analysis of corneal endothelial cell morphology: a review of techniques and their application. Optom Vis Sci 66:626–642

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schoessler JP, Orsborn GN (1987) A theory of corneal endothelial polymegethism and aging. Curr Eye Res 6:301–306

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Roszkowska AM, Colosi P, D’Angelo P, Ferreri G (2004) Age-related modifications of the corneal endothelium in adults. Int Ophthalmol 25:163–166

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schoessler P, Woloschak MJ (1981) Corneal endothelium in veteran PMMA contact lens wearers. Int Contact Lens Clin 8:19–25

    Google Scholar 

  6. Holden BA, Sweeney DF, Vannas A, Nilsson KT, Efron N (1985) Effects of long-term extended contact lens wear on the human cornea. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 26:1489–1501

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee JS, Oum BS, Choi HY, Lee JE, Cho BM (2006) Differences in corneal thickness and corneal endothelium related to duration in diabetes. Eye 20:315–318

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Edelhauser HF, Sanders DR, Azar R, Lamielle H (2004) Corneal endothelial assessment after ICL implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 30:576–583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee JS, Lee JE, Choi HY, Oum BS, Cho BM (2005) Corneal endothelial cell change after phacoemulsification relative to the severity of diabetic retinopathy. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:742–749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Patel SV, Hodge DO, Bourne WM (2005) Corneal endothelium and postoperative outcomes 15 years after penetrating keratoplasty. Am J Ophthalmol 139:311–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van Schaick W, van Dooren BT, Mulder PG, Volker-Dieben HJ (2005) Validity of endothelial cell analysis methods and recommendations for calibration in Topcon SP-2000P specular microscopy. Cornea 24:538–544

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wirbelauer C, Wollensak G, Pham DT (2005) Influence of cataract surgery on corneal endothelial cell density estimation. Cornea 24:135–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. de Sanctis U, Machetta F, Razzano L, Dalmasso P, Grignolo FM (2006) Corneal endothelium evaluation with 2 noncontact specular microscopes and their semiautomated methods of analysis. Cornea 25:501–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rao SK, Ranjan Sen P, Fogla R, Gangadharan S, Padmanabhan P, Badrinath SS (2000) Corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in normal Indian eyes. Cornea 19:820–823

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Padilla MD, Sibayan SA, Gonzales CS (2004) Corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in normal Filipino eyes. Cornea 23:129–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hashemian MN, Moghimi S, Fard MA, Fallah MR, Mansouri MR (2006) Corneal endothelial cell density and morphology in normal Iranian eyes. BMC Ophthalmol 6:6–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Guell JL, Morral M, Gris O, Gaytan J, Sisquella M, Manero F (2008) Five-year follow-up of 399 phakic Artisan-Verisyse implantation for myopia, hyperopia, and/or astigmatism. Ophthalmology 115:1002–1012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Becherer PD, Kempf JA (2004) Endothelial response to overnight corneal reshaping. Eye Contact Lens 30:207–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bourne WM, Hodge DO, Nelson LR (1994) Corneal endothelium five years after transplantation. Am J Ophthalmol 118:185–196

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Carlson KH, Bourne WM, Brubaker RF (1988) Effect of long-term contact lens wear on corneal endothelial cell morphology and function. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 29:185–193

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. MacRae SM, Rich LF (1998) Long-term effects of radial keratotomy on the corneal endothelium. J Refract Sur 14:49–52

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Munoz G, Alio JL, Montes-Mico R, Albarran-Diego C, Belda JI (2005) Artisan iris-claw phakic intraocular lens followed by laser in situ keratomileusis for high hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:308–317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mencucci R, Ponchietti C, Virgili G, Giansanti F, Menchini U (2006) Corneal endothelial damage after cataract surgery: Microincision versus standard technique. J Cataract Refract Surg 32:1351–1354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Matsuda M, Yee RW, Edelhauser HF (1985) Comparison of the corneal endothelium in an America and a Japanese population. Arch Ophthalmol 103:68–70

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Carlson KH, Bourne WM, McLaren JW, Brubaker RF (1988) Variations in human corneal endothelial cell morphology and permeability to fluorescein with age. Exp Eye Res 47:27–41

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Shenoy R, Khandekar R, Bialasiewicz A, Al Muniri A (2009) Corneal endothelium in patients with diabetes mellitus: a historical cohort study. Eur J Ophthalmol 19:369–375

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dupont WD, Plummer WD (1990) Power and sample size calculations: a review and computer program. Control Clin Trials 11:116–128

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dupont WD, Plummer WD (1998) Power and sample size calculations for studies involving linear regression. Control Clin Trials 19:589–601

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments and disclosure

The authors wish to thank ISAZA Portugal for the loan of the CSO Specular Microscope, and Óptica Queirós Lda for assistance in data collection. None of the authors has a commercial or financial interest in the instruments presented here. Present results have been presented in part at the 4th International Conference of Optometry and Visual Science (Braga, Portugal, 21st to 22nd April 2007).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical & Experimental Optometry Research Lab, Department of Physics (Optometry), School of Sciences, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057, Braga, Portugal

    Jose Manuel González-Méijome, Jorge Jorge & Antonio Queirós

  2. Óptica Queiros Lda., Póvoa de Lanhoso, Portugal

    Sofia C. Peixoto-de-Matos

  3. Department of Surgery (Ophthalmology), School of Optics and Optometry, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain

    Manuel A. Parafita

Authors
  1. Jose Manuel González-Méijome
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jorge Jorge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antonio Queirós
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sofia C. Peixoto-de-Matos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Manuel A. Parafita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jose Manuel González-Méijome.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

González-Méijome, J.M., Jorge, J., Queirós, A. et al. Two single descriptors of endothelial polymegethism and pleomorphism. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 248, 1159–1166 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-010-1337-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-010-1337-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation