AIM： To explore the effect of the posterior astigmatism on total corneal astigmatism and evaluate the error caused by substituting the corneal astigmatism of the simulated keratometriy （simulated K） for the total c...AIM： To explore the effect of the posterior astigmatism on total corneal astigmatism and evaluate the error caused by substituting the corneal astigmatism of the simulated keratometriy （simulated K） for the total corneal astigmatism in age-related cataract patients. METHODS： A total of 211 eyes with age-related cataract from 164 patients （mean age： 66.8±9.0y, range： 45-83y） were examined using a multi-colored spot reflection topographer, and the total corneal astigmatism was measured. The power vector components J0 and J45 were analyzed. Correlations between the magnitude difference of the simulated K and total cornea astigmatism （magnitude differenceSimK-Tca）, anterior J0, and absolute meridian difference （AMD） between the anterior and posterior astigmatisms were calculated. To compare the astigmatism of the simulated K and total cornea both in magnitude and axial orientation, we drew double-angle plots and calculated the vector difference between the two measures using vector analysis. A corrective regression formula was used to adjust the magnitude of the simulated K astigmatism to approach that of the total cornea. RESULTS： The magnitude differenceSimK-Tca was positively correlated with the anterior corneal J0 （Spearman’s rho= 0.539; P〈0.001） and negatively correlated with the AMDR （Spearman’s rho=-0.875, P〈0.001）. When the anterior J0 value was larger than 1.3 D or smaller than -0.8 D, the errors caused by determining the total corneal astigmatism with the karatometric calculation tended to be greater than 0.25 D. An underestimation by 16% was observed for against the rule （ATR） astigmatism and an overestimation by 9% was observed for with the rule （WTR） astigmatism when ignoring the posterior measurements. CONCLUSION： Posterior corneal astigmatism should be valued for more precise corneal astigmatism management, especially for higher ATR astigmatism of the anterior corneal surface. We suggest a 9% reduction in the magnitude of the simulated K in eyes with WTR astigmatism, and a 16% addition of the magnitude of the simulated K in eyes with ATR astigmatism.展开更多
AIM： To analyze the concentration-dependent effects of autologous serum （AS） and fetal bovine serum （FBS） on human corneal epithelial cell （HCEC） viability, migration and proliferation. METHODS： AS was prepar...AIM： To analyze the concentration-dependent effects of autologous serum （AS） and fetal bovine serum （FBS） on human corneal epithelial cell （HCEC） viability, migration and proliferation. METHODS： AS was prepared from 13 patients with non- healing epithelial defects Dulbecco＇s modified eagle medium/ Ham＇s F12 （DMEM/F12） with 5% FBS, 0.5% dimethyl sulphoxide （DMSO）, 10 ng/mL human epidermal growth factor, 1% insulin-transferrin-selenium, then were incubated in serum media： DMEM/F12 supplemented by 5%, 10%, 15% or 30% AS or FBS. HCEC viability was analyzed using cell proliferation kit XTI＇, migration using a wound healing assay, proliferation by the cell proliferation enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay （ELISA） BrdU kit. Statistical analysis was performed using the generalized linear model, the values at 30% AS or 30% FBS were used as the baselines. RESULTS： HCEC viability was the highest at 30% AS or 15% FBS and the lowest at 10% AS or 30% FBS application. HCEC migration was the quickest through 30% AS or 30% FBS and the slowest through 5% AS or 5% FBS concentrations. Proliferation was the most increased through 15% AS or 5% FBS and the least increased through 30% AS or 30% FBS concentrations. HCEC viability at 10% and 15% AS was significantly worse （P=0.001, P=0.023） compared to baseline and significantly better at 15% FBS （P=0.003） concentrations. HCEC migration was significantly worse （P〈0.007） and HCEC proliferation significantly better （P〈0.001） in all concentration groups compared to baseline. CONCLUSION： For the best viability of HCEC 30% AS or 15% FBS, for HCEC migration 30% AS or 30% FBS, for proliferation 15% AS or 5% FBS should be used. Therefore, we suggest the use of 30% AS in clinical practice.展开更多
基金Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81670837)the Scientific and Technological Project of Tianjin Health Bureau(No.2015KY38)
文摘AIM： To explore the effect of the posterior astigmatism on total corneal astigmatism and evaluate the error caused by substituting the corneal astigmatism of the simulated keratometriy （simulated K） for the total corneal astigmatism in age-related cataract patients. METHODS： A total of 211 eyes with age-related cataract from 164 patients （mean age： 66.8±9.0y, range： 45-83y） were examined using a multi-colored spot reflection topographer, and the total corneal astigmatism was measured. The power vector components J0 and J45 were analyzed. Correlations between the magnitude difference of the simulated K and total cornea astigmatism （magnitude differenceSimK-Tca）, anterior J0, and absolute meridian difference （AMD） between the anterior and posterior astigmatisms were calculated. To compare the astigmatism of the simulated K and total cornea both in magnitude and axial orientation, we drew double-angle plots and calculated the vector difference between the two measures using vector analysis. A corrective regression formula was used to adjust the magnitude of the simulated K astigmatism to approach that of the total cornea. RESULTS： The magnitude differenceSimK-Tca was positively correlated with the anterior corneal J0 （Spearman’s rho= 0.539; P〈0.001） and negatively correlated with the AMDR （Spearman’s rho=-0.875, P〈0.001）. When the anterior J0 value was larger than 1.3 D or smaller than -0.8 D, the errors caused by determining the total corneal astigmatism with the karatometric calculation tended to be greater than 0.25 D. An underestimation by 16% was observed for against the rule （ATR） astigmatism and an overestimation by 9% was observed for with the rule （WTR） astigmatism when ignoring the posterior measurements. CONCLUSION： Posterior corneal astigmatism should be valued for more precise corneal astigmatism management, especially for higher ATR astigmatism of the anterior corneal surface. We suggest a 9% reduction in the magnitude of the simulated K in eyes with WTR astigmatism, and a 16% addition of the magnitude of the simulated K in eyes with ATR astigmatism.
文摘AIM： To analyze the concentration-dependent effects of autologous serum （AS） and fetal bovine serum （FBS） on human corneal epithelial cell （HCEC） viability, migration and proliferation. METHODS： AS was prepared from 13 patients with non- healing epithelial defects Dulbecco＇s modified eagle medium/ Ham＇s F12 （DMEM/F12） with 5% FBS, 0.5% dimethyl sulphoxide （DMSO）, 10 ng/mL human epidermal growth factor, 1% insulin-transferrin-selenium, then were incubated in serum media： DMEM/F12 supplemented by 5%, 10%, 15% or 30% AS or FBS. HCEC viability was analyzed using cell proliferation kit XTI＇, migration using a wound healing assay, proliferation by the cell proliferation enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay （ELISA） BrdU kit. Statistical analysis was performed using the generalized linear model, the values at 30% AS or 30% FBS were used as the baselines. RESULTS： HCEC viability was the highest at 30% AS or 15% FBS and the lowest at 10% AS or 30% FBS application. HCEC migration was the quickest through 30% AS or 30% FBS and the slowest through 5% AS or 5% FBS concentrations. Proliferation was the most increased through 15% AS or 5% FBS and the least increased through 30% AS or 30% FBS concentrations. HCEC viability at 10% and 15% AS was significantly worse （P=0.001, P=0.023） compared to baseline and significantly better at 15% FBS （P=0.003） concentrations. HCEC migration was significantly worse （P〈0.007） and HCEC proliferation significantly better （P〈0.001） in all concentration groups compared to baseline. CONCLUSION： For the best viability of HCEC 30% AS or 15% FBS, for HCEC migration 30% AS or 30% FBS, for proliferation 15% AS or 5% FBS should be used. Therefore, we suggest the use of 30% AS in clinical practice.
