ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2019
Quantitative assessment of human donor corneal endothelium with Gabor domain optical coherence microscopy.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2019. 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.
- Detection of refractive photokeratectomy traces during eye banking: impossible with organ culture but possible with an active storage machine: case report.Cell and tissue banking · 2021Article
- Unbiased corneal tissue analysis using Gabor-domain optical coherence microscopy and machine learning for automatic segmentation of corneal endothelial cells.Journal of biomedical optics · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We report on a pathway for Gabor domain optical coherence microscopy (GD-OCM)-based metrology to assess the donor’s corneal endothelial layers ex vivo. Six corneas from the Lions Eye Bank at Albany and Rochester were imaged with GD-OCM. The raw 3-D images of the curved corneas were flattened using custom software to enhance the 2-D visualization of endothelial cells (ECs); then the ECs within a circle of 500-μm-diameter were analyzed using a custom corner method and a cell counting plugin in ImageJ. The EC number, EC area, endothelial cell density (ECD), and polymegethism (CV) were quantified in five different locations for each cornea. The robustness of the method (defined as the repeatability of measurement together with interoperator variability) was evaluated by independently repeating the entire ECD measurement procedure six times by three different examiners. The results from the six corneas show that the current modality reproduces the ECDs with a standard deviation of 2.3% of the mean ECD in every location, whereas the mean ECD across five locations varies by 5.1%. The resolution and imaging area provided through the use of GD-OCM may help to ultimately better assess the quality of donor corneas in transplantation.
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.