London 2014 Registration Visa Letters Programme Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2014 Exhibition Hotel Booking Virtual Exhibition Star Alliance
london escrs

Course handouts are now available
Click here

Come to London


WATCH to find out why

Site updates:

Programme Updates. Programme Overview and - Video Symposium on Challenging Cases now available.


Search Abstracts by author or title
(results will display both Free Papers & Poster)

Comparison of four specular microscopes for assessing endothelial cells

Poster Details

First Author: P.Draschl AUSTRIA

Co Author(s):    N. Hirnschall   N. Luft   S. Schuschitz   O. Findl     

Abstract Details


To compare four specular microscopes in corneas of healthy eyes and patients with cornea guttata and after corneal grafts.


Vienna Institute for Research in Ocular Surgery, Department of Ophthalmology, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna.


Three examiners who were inexperienced in measuring with all four investigated specular microscopes, namely CellChek XL (Konan Medical, Japan), CEM-530 (Nidek Co., LTD., Japan), EM-3000 (Tomey, Japan) and Perseus (Bon, Germany) received an introduction for each of the four devices for half a day. On the next day the same 3 examiners measured healthy volunteers, patients with cornea gutata and patients who had undergone corneal grafting. Each patient was measured by the same examiner and the order of instrument used was randomised. Three measurements were performed of each eye for each device and the time taken for data entry, scanning and the automated analysis was recorded.


In total, 80 eyes of 40 subjects (age 65 years, SD 18) were included. In 22 cases the corneas were classified as 'healthy', 33 eyes were post-DSAEK, 3 eyes post-PK, 17 eyes had cornea guttata and 5 eyes had corneal scars. Number of successful scans in the automated and post-processed mode, reproducibility and interchangeability will be presented. Total measurement duration (seconds) for the CellChek XL, CEM-530, EM-3000 and Perseus device was 74 (SD: 22), 53 (SD: 12), 65 (SD: 20) and 54 (SD: 21), respectively. The CellChek XL device was significantly slower compared to all other devices (p<0.01), but no significant differences between the other devices were observed concerning time taken.


The Perseus and CEM-530 device were extremely fast and showed robust measurements, the CellChek XL device took longer, but allowed extensive post-processing and had an exportable database. The EM-3000 device was found to range between the fast devices and the CellChek XL. FINANCIAL INTEREST: NONE

Back to Poster listing