Ophthalmic Surgery, Lasers and Imaging Retina

The articles prior to January 2013 are part of the back file collection and are not available with a current paid subscription. To access the article, you may purchase it or purchase the complete back file collection here

Clinical Science 

Reproducibility of an Analysis Software for Qualitative Observation of Elschnig Pearls

Nino Hirnschall, MD; Thomas Neumayer, MD; Wolf Buehl, MD; Oliver Findl, MD, MBA

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To determine the reproducibility of a semi-objective analysis software for the morphological analysis of single Elschnig pearls from retroillumination images of posterior capsule opacification.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective study, images of eyes with varying degrees of regeneratory posterior capsule opacification and the presence of Elschnig pearls were taken. The size and morphology of single Elschnig pearls was evaluated from consecutive images using an analysis method called PearlTracer using three different modes: snake selection, where a few points detected the pearl border automatically; diameter circle selection, a circle function; and polygon selection, where several points were connected by straight lines. The interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility and the limits of the different modes concerning contrast were assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-eight retroillumination images of 55 eyes of 50 patients were included with a total of 857 pearls being analyzed. A high interobserver reproducibility was found, as well as a high intraobserver reproducibility. Furthermore, a significant difference in the pearl size and the pearl morphology between the three analysis features of the software was found.

CONCLUSION

For the observation of single Elschnig pearls and their morphological changes, the semi-objective PearlTracer analysis software was found to be a highly reproducible and useful method.

[Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging 2010;41:507-511.]

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To determine the reproducibility of a semi-objective analysis software for the morphological analysis of single Elschnig pearls from retroillumination images of posterior capsule opacification.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective study, images of eyes with varying degrees of regeneratory posterior capsule opacification and the presence of Elschnig pearls were taken. The size and morphology of single Elschnig pearls was evaluated from consecutive images using an analysis method called PearlTracer using three different modes: snake selection, where a few points detected the pearl border automatically; diameter circle selection, a circle function; and polygon selection, where several points were connected by straight lines. The interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility and the limits of the different modes concerning contrast were assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-eight retroillumination images of 55 eyes of 50 patients were included with a total of 857 pearls being analyzed. A high interobserver reproducibility was found, as well as a high intraobserver reproducibility. Furthermore, a significant difference in the pearl size and the pearl morphology between the three analysis features of the software was found.

CONCLUSION

For the observation of single Elschnig pearls and their morphological changes, the semi-objective PearlTracer analysis software was found to be a highly reproducible and useful method.

[Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging 2010;41:507-511.]

Authors

From Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (NH, OF), London, United Kingdom; the Department of Ophthalmology (NH, OF), Vienna Institute for Research in Ocular Surgery, a Karl Landsteiner Institute, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna, Austria; and the Department of Ophthalmology (TN, WB), Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Originally submitted July 16, 2009. Accepted for publication May 20, 2010. Posted online July 29, 2010.

Supported in part by the Department of Health through the award made by the National Institute for Health Research to Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology for a Specialist Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Health.

The authors have no financial or proprietary interest in the materials presented herein.

Address correspondence to Oliver Findl, MD, MBA, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, City Road, London EC1V 2PD, United Kingdom. E-mail: oliver@findl.at

10.3928/15428877-20100726-02

Sign up to receive

Journal E-contents