Corneal Endothelial Cell Density in Uveal Coloboma Associated With Microcornea

Dhakal, Rohit; Mohamed, Ashik; Chaurasia, Sunita; Ramappa, Muralidhar; Jalali, Subhadra

doi:10.1097/ico.0000000000001755

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding ECD, previous reports have shown obviously condensed ECD in the small cornea. 6,12 By contrast, in this study, ECD was not significantly different among the MC-child and CC groups or the MC-adult and SC groups (Figs. 1, 3).…”

Section: Specular Microscopy Analysiscontrasting

confidence: 77%

“…[20][21][22] Increased ECD has been reported in MC, showing 3436.6 6 316.2 versus 2761.8 6 140.9 cells/mm 2 in patients diagnosed with MC and uveal coloboma, and control patients with normal eyes. 6 In isolated iris coloboma eyes, Karatepe Hashas et al 12 also reported increased corneal ECD in patients with coloboma eyes, with a mean ECD of 3160.7 6 430.9 cells/mm 2 . In this study, ECD of child and adult controls was 3155.13 6 372.67 and 2749.33 6 399.63 cells/mm 2 , respectively, which is consistent with what has been reported in the literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…For instance, increased central corneal thickness (CCT) and endothelial cell density (ECD) have been reported in patients with MC associated with uveal coloboma. 6,7 MC may also present abnormal keratometry and induce refractive errors. 8 There is still much that is unknown about MC without coloboma or with normal axis length.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Corneal Biometric Parameters and Refractive Properties in Microcornea With Normal Axial Length

Jiang

Wang²,

Chen³

et al. 2021

Cornea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the features of and relationships among corneal diameter, central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell density (ECD), and corneal refractive properties in cases of microcornea (MC) with normal axial length.Methods:We included 22 patients (35 eyes) with MC and cataracts and 41 patients (48 eyes) with isolated cataracts as age-matched controls. They were divided into patients with MC younger than 18 years (MC-child), patients with MC 18 years or older (MC-adult), children with congenital cataracts (CCs), and adults with senile cataracts (SCs). Corneal diameter, axial and anterior chamber length, and keratometry were measured; central corneal endothelial cell imaging was performed.Results:The mean horizontal corneal diameter was 7.71 ± 1.51 and 8.78 ± 0.52 mm in MC-child and MC-adult groups, respectively, and 11.89 ± 0.59 and 11.52 ± 2.42 mm in child and adult controls, respectively. The mean CCT was 641.26 ± 63.37 (MC-child) and 617.38 ± 45.40 mm (MC-adult), and 554.92 ± 34.64 (CC) and 551.58 ± 28.47 mm (SC). The mean ECD was 2898.47 ± 443.90 (MC-child) and 2825.81 ± 484.65 cells/mm2 (MC-adult), and 3155.13 ± 372.67 (CC) and 2749.33 ± 399.63 cells/mm2 (SC). The average keratometry was 44.22 ± 3.14 D (MC-child) and 43.86 ± 2.59 D (MC-adult), and 44.19 ± 1.44 D (CC) and 43.94 ± 1.34 D (SC).Conclusions:Patients with MC and normal axial length possess specific parameters, including significantly smaller corneal diameter and thicker CCT than the patients in the control groups. There were no significant differences in ECD and average keratometry. These parameters should be taken into account in the follow-up and treatment.

show abstract

Section: Specular Microscopy Analysiscontrasting

confidence: 77%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corneal Biometric Parameters and Refractive Properties in Microcornea With Normal Axial Length

Jiang

Wang²,

Chen³

et al. 2021

Cornea

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 On correlating ECD with corneal biometrics (CCT, keratometry, and HCD), a notable finding was a positive correlation between ECD and HCD. In an earlier study on endothelial parameters in eyes with uveal coloboma, 7 it was found that ECD had an inverse relationship with mean corneal diameter, and those with microcornea had a higher ECD when compared with normal eyes. This was theoretically attributed to the reduced posterior corneal surface in uveal coloboma associated with microcornea, thereby leading to compaction of endothelial cells and increased ECD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Characteristics of Corneal Endothelium in Axenfeld Rieger Spectrum

Achanta

Chaurasia

Mohamed

et al. 2022

Cornea

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The purpose of this study was to compare the corneal endothelial characteristics in Axenfeld anomaly (AXA), Rieger anomaly (RGA), and Axenfeld-Rieger anomaly/syndrome with age-matched healthy controls.Methods: This is a retrospective, comparative case-control study of 52 eyes of 30 patients with AXA/RGA and AXA/S and 36 controls.Results: Median age at endothelial imaging was 21.5 years (interquartile range, 13.8-33.3 years). In the study group, the mean endothelial cell density (ECD) was 2112.4 6 78.5 cells/mm 2 , the mean cell area (MCA) was 526.9 6 28.5 mm 2 , and the coefficient of variation of cell size was 41.2 6 1.8%. The ECD was significantly (all, P , 0.0001) lower than controls, while MCA (P , 0.0001), SD of cell size (P , 0.0001), and maximum cell area (P = 0.0007) were significantly higher than controls. Four eyes of 3 patients had guttae on slitlamp evaluation and endothelial imaging. There were no differences in the corneal endothelial characteristics among the clinical subtypes.Conclusions: Patients with AXA, RGA, and Axenfeld-Rieger anomaly/syndrome have lower ECD and increased MCA compared with normal eyes. The reduced ECD associated with inherent anterior segment alterations can predispose to the risk of postcataract surgery endothelial decompensation in these eyes. The association of guttae in some eyes needs further investigational studies.

show abstract

“…Thrice in the last 2 years, variation in the size of endothelial cells has been spelled polymegathism. [1][2][3] The correct term polymegethism appeared once, 4 having before that been correctly applied for many years as it should be in a journal dedicated to the cornea.…”

Section: Beware Of Polymegathismmentioning

confidence: 99%