ArticlePloS one2014
Long-term tracking of the central corneal endothelial mosaic.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent advances in corneal specular microscopy image analysis through artificial intelligence.PLOS digital health · 2026Review
- Near infra-red labelling and tracking of corneal endothelial cells in-vivo.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Automated segmentation of the corneal endothelium in a large set of 'real-world' specular microscopy images using the U-Net architecture.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWhen comparing follow-up endothelial cell (EC) density measurements it is only possible to demonstrate cell loss in large cohorts or in pronounced cases due to the standard deviation of measurements. However, especially in clinical studies or refractive surgery patients, EC stability is an important factor. Thus we developed a computer program to achieve cell-by-cell alignment of conventional specular non-contact EC photographs. This is a pilot study to evaluate whether this new diagnostic technique is applicable in postoperative patients.
methodsDigitized endothelial cell photos of 30 eyes following implantation of a phakic posterior chamber intraocular lens for correction of high myopia were analyzed. All EC centroids were dotted on each image, and early and late follow-up pictures were automatically aligned on the basis of these centroids. The tracking results were confirmed via alternating image presentation of the corresponding image areas, and were reviewed for loss of individual cells. In addition, conventional EC density measurements were performed.
resultsMean time interval between first and second postoperative EC image was 1.4 years (range 3 months-2.2 years), with early images taken at a median of 5.5 months after IOL implantation (lower/upper quartile 1.2-12.3 months). Extrapolated central EC density was 2812±500/mm2 at the first time point, and 2797±524/mm2 at the second time point. In 26 out of 30 image pairs, the EC mosaic was successfully retraced; cell loss in this area was excluded via photo flickering. Only in 4 image pairs, the EC mosaic could not be matched.
conclusionsWe demonstrate that the corneal EC mosaic of clinical routine non-contact microscope pictures can be superimposed and compared on single cell level over time with our new computer based program. This new method is valuable to judge on EC stability even in small cohorts since it does not require mean values and standard deviations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.