Technician Consistency in Specular Microscopy Measurements: A "Real-World" Retrospective Analysis of a United States Eye Bank

Comparison of Donor Corneal Endothelial Cell Density Determined by Eye Banks and by a Central Image Analysis Reading Center Using the Same Image Analysis Method

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate agreement between eye banks (EBs) and an image analysis reading center on endothelial cell density (ECD) determinations using the same image analysis method.

METHODS

The Cornea Image Analysis Reading Center (CIARC) determined ECD with a single experienced analyst on EB-obtained central endothelial images from donors intended for keratoplasty from 2 eye banks, Eversight and Lions VisionGift, using the Konan center analysis method. The EBs performed ECD determination on their respective sets of images using the same analysis method with experienced eye bank technicians.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 200 donors was 54 years (range 30-75 years). Seventy (35%) of the 200 patients were women, and 57 (29%) were diabetic. The mean ECD was 10 cells/mm2 greater by the EBs than by CIARC (P = 0.39), with 95% limits of agreement of [-304 to 323 cells/mm2]. The mean difference was not substantially changed when the difference between EBs and CIARC ECD was adjusted for sex, donor age, donor diabetes, CV, HEX, number of cells analyzed, and EBs as a random effect (estimated mean difference of 20 cells/mm2 after adjustment in a linear mixed model; P = 0.73). The EB-determined preoperative ECD was within 10% of the CIARC-determined ECD for 178 (89%) image sets, with 15 (8%) higher by >10% and 7 (3%) lower by >10%.

CONCLUSIONS

Well-trained eye bank technicians achieve comparable results for ECD determination with an experienced image analyst from an image analysis reading center when the same image analysis method is used.

Characterization of Corneal Donor Tissue Lesions by Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography Compared With Eye Bank Technician Slit-Lamp Examination

PURPOSE

To compare anterior segment spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) with eye bank technician slit-lamp examination (SLE) in characterizing lesions in donor corneas.

METHODS

Twenty-nine donor corneas identified by eye bank technicians to have opacities or lesions potentially representing pathologic findings affecting the stroma were evaluated through the use of technician SLE, SLE photography, and OCT. Technicians were tasked with describing the lesion, estimating the lesion depth, and photographing their SLE findings. A masked grader evaluated the OCT images and measured the lesion depth using customized software. The lesions identified on OCT were then compared with those identified on SLE.

RESULTS

A total of 37 lesions were detected on SLE; 25 of the 37 lesions identified on SLE were matched to a lesion on OCT. SLE and OCT depth measurements were statistically significantly different (P = 0.0042, mean difference 4.8% ± 6.5%), and OCT graded lesions as slightly deeper. Of the 12 out of the 37 lesions that were noted on SLE (but not identified on OCT), these included 2 central and paracentral anterior stromal lesions (OCT showed loose epithelium), 5 peripheral anterior stromal lesions, and 5 corneas with LASIK.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights both advantages and limitations of OCT compared with technician SLE in the evaluation of donor corneal tissue. Although OCT may miss some peripheral lesions and LASIK scars that are identifiable on SLE, OCT's depth resolution is helpful in differentiating whether shallow anterior opacities actually extend deeper into the stroma or are confined superficially to the epithelium.

Novel Image-Based Analysis for Reduction of Clinician-Dependent Variability in Measurement of the Corneal Ulcer Size

PURPOSE

To assess variability in corneal ulcer measurements between ophthalmologists and reduce clinician-dependent variability using semiautomated segmentation of the ulcer from photographs.

METHODS

Three ophthalmologists measured 50 patients' eyes for epithelial defects (EDs) and the stromal infiltrate (SI) size using slit-lamp (SL) calipers. SL photographs were obtained. An algorithm was developed for semiautomatic segmenting of the ED and SI in the photographs. Semiautomatic segmentation was repeated 3 times by different users (2 ophthalmologists and 1 trainee). Clinically significant variability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the percentage of pairwise measurements differing by ≥0.5 mm. Semiautomatic segmentation measurements were compared with manual delineation of the image by a corneal specialist (gold standard) using Dice similarity coefficients.

RESULTS

Ophthalmologists' reliability in measurements by SL calipers had an ICC from 0.84 to 0.88 between examiners. Measurements by semiautomatic segmentation had an ICC from 0.96 to 0.98. SL measures of ulcers by clinical versus semiautomatic segmentation measures differed by ≥0.5 mm in 24% to 38% versus 8% to 28% (ED height); 30% to 52% versus 12% to 34% (ED width); 26% to 38% versus 10% to 32% (SI height); and 38% to 58% versus 14% to 34% (SI width), respectively. Average Dice similarity coefficients between manual and repeated semiautomatic segmentation ranged from 0.83 to 0.86 for the ED and 0.78 to 0.83 for the SI.

CONCLUSIONS

Variability exists when measuring corneal ulcers, even among ophthalmologists. Photography and computerized methods for quantifying the ulcer size could reduce variability while remaining accurate and impact quantitative measurement endpoints.