Key Laboratory of Vision Science

Wenzhou, China

Key Laboratory of Vision Science

Wenzhou, China
SEARCH FILTERS
Time filter
Source Type

Chen X.,Wenzhou Medical College | Chen X.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Wang J.,Wenzhou Medical College | Wang J.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | And 13 more authors.
Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science | Year: 2011

PURPOSE. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) can contribute to tumorigenesis by acting as either oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes. The authors' previous studies on miR-34a showed that miRNA can influence the growth of uveal melanoma cells. In this study, they investigated the role of miR-137 in the pathogenesis of uveal melanoma. METHODS. Real-time RT-PCR was used to screen the expression levels of miR-137 in uveal melanocytes and uveal melanoma cell lines. Cell proliferation was examined by MTS assay and cell cycle was analyzed by flow cytometry. The target genes of miR-137 were predicted by bioinformatics and confirmed using a luciferase reporter assay. The expression of MITF, CDK6, and cell cycle regulatory proteins was determined by Western blot analysis. The ability to increase miR-137 expression by epigenetic drugs was tested using real-time RT-PCR. RESULTS. miR-137 expression was lower in uveal melanoma cell lines than in uveal melanocytes. Ectopic transfection of miR-137 into uveal melanoma cells induced G1 cell cycle arrest, leading to a significant decrease in cell growth. Overexpression of miR-137 downregulated MITF, a transcription factor with oncogenic activity. Moreover, the introduction of miR-137 downregulated the oncogenic tyrosine kinase protein receptor c-Met and cell cycle-related proteins, including CDK6. One avenue to increase the expression levels of miR-137 was through treatment with a DNA hypomethylating agent, 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine, and a histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin A. © 2011 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.


Huang J.,Wenzhou Medical College | Huang J.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Lu W.,Wenzhou Medical College | Savini G.,Gb Bietti Eye Foundation Irccs | And 7 more authors.
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery | Year: 2013

Purpose: To evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility of corneal thickness measurements in post-laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) eyes using a rotating Scheimpflug camera combined with a Placido disk corneal topographer (Sirius) and compare the results with those of ultrasound (US) pachymetry. Setting: Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical College, Wenzhou, China. Design: Comparative evaluation of a diagnostic test or technology. Methods: Patients were examined 3 times with the Scheimpflug-Placido topographer by 2 examiners. The central pupil corneal thickness (CTpupil), apical corneal thickness (CTapex), and thinnest corneal thickness (CT thinnest) were recorded. After noncontact examinations, US pachymetry was used to obtain the central corneal thickness (CCT). Results: The Scheimpflug-Placido topographer showed high intraoperator repeatability as indicated by a test-retest repeatability of less than 8.5 μm for CT pupil, CTapex, and CTthinnest, The coefficients of variation (CoV) were less than 0.7%, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was higher than 0.99. Excellent results were also obtained for interoperator reproducibility. All CoVs were less than 0.5%. The 95% limits of agreement between the Scheimpflug-Placido measurement and the US pachymetry measurements were narrow (-16.62 to 12.44 μm for CTpupil versus US pachymetry CCT; -17.49 to 12.16 μm for CTapex versus US pachymetry CCT; -18.59 to 10.90 μm for CTthinnest versus US pachymetry CCT). Conclusions: The Scheimpflug-Placido topographer showed excellent intraoperator repeatability and interoperator reproducibility of CTpupil, CTapex, and CTthinnest measurements in post-LASIK eyes. The CCT measurements obtained using the device were in high agreement with those obtained by US pachymetry, suggesting that the 2 devices are interchangeable. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. © 2013 ASCRS and ESCRS Published by Elsevier Inc.


Wang Q.,Wenzhou Medical College | Wang Q.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Savini G.,Gb Bietti Eye Foundation Irccs | Hoffer K.J.,University of California at Los Angeles | And 9 more authors.
PLoS ONE | Year: 2012

Purpose: To comprehensively assess the precision and agreement of anterior corneal power measurements using 8 different devices. Methods: Thirty-five eyes from 35 healthy subjects were included in the prospective study. In the first session, a single examiner performed on each subject randomly measurements with the RC-5000 (Tomey Corp., Japan), KR-8000 (Topcon, Japan), IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany), E300 (Medmont International, Australia), Allegro Topolyzer (Wavelight AG, Germany), Vista (EyeSys, TX), Pentacam (Oculus, Germany) and Sirius (CSO, Italy). Measurements were repeated in the second session (1 to 2 weeks later). Repeatability and reproducibility of corneal power measurements were assessed based on the intrasession and intersession within-subject standard deviation (Sw), repeatability (2.77Sw), coefficient of variation (COV), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement was evaluated by 95% limits of agreement (LoA). Results: All devices demonstrated high repeatability and reproducibility of the keratometric values (2.77Sw<0.36D, COV<0.3%, ICC>0.98). Repeated-measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni post test showed statistically significant differences (P<0.01) among mean keratometric values of most instruments; the largest differences were observed between the EyeSys Vista and Medmont E300. Good agreement (i.e., 95%LoA within ±0.5D) was found between most instruments for flat, steep and mean keratometry, except for EyeSys and Medmont. Repeatability and reproducibility of vectors J0 and J45 was good, as the ICCs were higher than 0.9, except J45 of Medmont and Pentacam. For the 95% LoAs of J0 and J45, they were all ≤ ±0.31 among any two paired devices. Conclusions: The 8 devices showed excellent repeatability and reproducibility. The results obtained using the RC-5000, KR-8000, IOLMaster, Allegro Topolyzer, Pentacam and Sirius were comparable, suggesting that they could be used interchangeably in most clinical settings. Caution is warranted with the measurements of the EyeSys Vista and Medmont E300, which should not be used interchangeably with other devices due to lower agreement. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01587287. © 2012 Wang et al.


Wen D.,No180 Hospital Of Chinese Pla | Huang J.,Wenzhou University | Huang J.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Li X.,No180 Hospital Of Chinese Pla | And 5 more authors.
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology | Year: 2014

Background: To identify possible differences between laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy and epipolis laser in situ keratomileusis for myopia. Design: Meta-analysis. Participants: Patients from previously reported comparative studies treated by laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy versus epipolis laser in situ keratomileusis. Methods: A systematic literature retrieval was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, up to January 2013. The included studies were subject to a meta-analysis using a RevMan 5.1 version software. Main Outcome Measures: The differences in efficacy, predictability, safety, epithelial healing time, pain perception and corneal haze formation. Results: A total of six studies involving 517 eyes were included. There were no statistically significant differences in the final proportion of eyes with uncorrected visual acuity of 6/6 or better (P=0.43), mean postoperative uncorrected visual acuity (P=0.53), final proportion of eyes with refraction within ±0.50D (P=0.62) and ±1.00D (P=0.16) of target, final proportion of eyes losing two or more lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (P=1.00), healing time of corneal epithelium (P=0.58), final proportion of eyes with corneal haze grade 0.5 or higher (P=0.26), and corneal haze levels (P=0.36). Conclusions: There were no significant differences in efficacy, predictability, safety, epithelial healing time and corneal haze formation between laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy and epipolis laser in situ keratomileusis, but the result was limited. Future more data are required to detect the potential differences between the two procedures. © 2013 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists.


Wang Q.,Wenzhou University | Wang Q.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Hua Y.,Wenzhou University | Hua Y.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | And 8 more authors.
Cornea | Year: 2015

Purpose: To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of corneal power values obtained by a Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) system (RTVue) and to compare them with the values obtained by a Scheimpflug camera system (Pentacam HR) and by automated keratometry (IOL Master). Methods: Thirty-two eyes from 32 healthy subjects were included in this prospective study. Two experienced observers measured each eye 3 consecutive times with the Pentacam, IOLMaster, and RTVue centered on either the pupil or corneal vertex. The conventional keratometry equivalent (CKE) and anterior (Ka), posterior (Kp), and net (Kn) corneal power values were determined. Results: The corneal power values obtained by the RTVue showed high repeatability (all intraclass correlation coefficient >0.96) and reproducibility (coefficient of variation <1.0%). Pupil-centered FD-OCT performed slightly better than corneal vertex-centered FD-OCT. Mean corneal values had higher reproducibly than any of the individual values. CKE, K a, K p, and K n obtained by FD-OCT were 0.62 to 0.68 diopters (D), 0.70 to 0.76 D, 0.11 to 0.13 D, and 0.93 to 0.94 D higher than those obtained by the Pentacam HR, respectively. CKE and K a obtained with the RTVue were also 0.60 to 0.74 D higher than those obtained with the IOLMaster, respectively. Conclusions: The corneal power measurements obtained by the RTVue FD-OCT system showed high repeatability and reproducibility. Measurements obtained by FD-OCT with pupil centration were more reproducible than those obtained by FD-OCT with corneal vertex centration. We recommend that pupil-centered FD-OCT be used in clinical applications. Neither RTVue versus Pentacam HR nor RTVue versus IOLMaster can be used interchangeably. © Copyright © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.


Wang Q.,Wenzhou University | Wang Q.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Ding X.,Wenzhou University | Ding X.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | And 8 more authors.
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery | Year: 2015

Purpose To determine the repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of anterior chamber depth (ACD) measurements obtained with 3 Scheimpflug cameras and an anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) device. Setting Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Zhejiang, China. Design Observational cross-sectional study. Methods Two observers took 3 consecutive measurements in healthy right eyes using each device to assess intraoperator repeatability. The mean values obtained at different sessions by the first operator were used to determine the intersession reproducibility. Three consecutive measurements obtained by the first operator at the first session were averaged and used to assess agreement. Results The ACD measurements obtained by 2 observers in 71 eyes were highly repeatable using the 4 devices, with a test-retest repeatability of 0.04 to 0.07 mm for intraoperator repeatability. The interoperator and intersession reproducibility of ACD measurements were high, and the test-retest repeatability ranges of interoperator and intersession reproducibility were 0.06 to 0.07 mm and 0.05 to 0.08 mm, respectively. The ACD measurements of the 4 systems were sorted from the thickest to the thinnest (Galilei G2 > Visante > Sirius > Pentacam). The differences in the measurements were statistically significant except between the ACD measurements obtained by the Sirius device and the Visante device. However, good agreement with narrow 95% limits of agreement was found between these devices. Conclusions The 4 devices provided high intraoperator repeatability and interoperator and intersession reproducibility for ACD measurements. Good agreement in ACD measurements was found between the devices in healthy eyes. Financial Disclosure No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. © 2015 ASCRS and ESCRS.


Huang J.,Wenzhou University | Huang J.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Savini G.,Wenzhou University | Li J.,Wenzhou University | And 8 more authors.
British Journal of Ophthalmology | Year: 2014

Objective: To assess the reliability of ocular component measurements with a new optical biometry device (AL-Scan; Nidek) and compare these measurements with those of the IOLMaster (Carl Zeiss Meditec) in patients with cataract. Methods: Sixty-eight cataractous eyes of 68 patients were included in the prospective study. To assess AL-Scan repeatability and reproducibility, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth (ACD), keratometry (K) over 2.4 mm and 3.3 mm diameter, axial length (AL), white to white (WTW), and pupil distance (PD) values were measured by two operators. ACD, K, AL and WTW were also measured with the IOLMaster to investigate the level of agreement. Calculations of intraocular lens (IOL) power were compared between the two devices. Results: AL-Scan measurements were highly repeatable and reproducible, except for WTW and PD. Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement between devices for AL, ACD and most K values. Compared with the IOLMaster, AL-Scan-derived K values using a diameter of 2.4 mm showed a narrower 95% limit of agreement (LoA) than those obtained with a diameter of 3.3 mm. However, poor agreement of WTW measurements was found. The 95% LoAs between devices for IOL calculations were smaller when based on AL-Scan K measurements using a diameter of 2.4 mm rather than 3.3 mm. Conclusions: The repeatability and reproducibility of AL-Scan was excellent for all parameters, except WTW and PD. Excluding WTW, good agreement was found between the AL-Scan and IOLMaster. The 2.4-mm diameter K value may be the most reliable choice for calculation of IOL power with the AL-Scan.


Huang J.,Wenzhou University | Huang J.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Ding X.,Wenzhou University | Ding X.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | And 8 more authors.
Ophthalmology | Year: 2013

Purpose: To assess the repeatability and reproducibility of 3 rotating Scheimpflug cameras, the Pentacam (Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany), Sirius (Costruzione Strumenti Oftalmici, Florence, Italy), and Galilei (Ziemer, Biel, Switzerland), and 1 Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) system, the RTvue-100 OCT (Optovue Inc., Fremont, CA), in measuring corneal thickness. Design: Evaluation of diagnostic test. Participants: Sixty-six right eyes of 66 healthy volunteers, whose mean age ± standard deviation (SD) was 35.39±10.06 years (range, 18-55 years). Methods: Corneal thickness measurements obtained by each system included central corneal thickness (CCT), thinnest corneal thickness (TCT), and midperipheral corneal thickness (MPCT), measured at superior, inferior, nasal, and temporal locations at a distance of 1 and 2.5 mm from the corneal apex. In the first session, 3 consecutive measurements were performed by the same operator to assess intraobserver repeatability and by a second operator to assess interobserver reproducibility. Measurements were repeated in the second session scheduled 1 day to 1 week later. The mean values obtained in the 2 sessions by the first operator were used to investigate the intersession reproducibility. Main Outcome Measures: Intraobserver repeatability and interobserver and intersession repeatability of corneal thickness measurements, as calculated by means of within-subject SD, test-retest repeatability, coefficient of variation (COV), and intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: The precision of CCT, TCT, CT2 mm (midperipheral corneal thickness [MPCT] with a distance of 1 mm from the corneal apex), and CT5 mm (midperipheral corneal thickness [MPCT] with a distance of 2.5 mm from the corneal apex) measurements was high with all 4 systems. The COV was ≤1.16%, 0.94%, and 1.10% for repeatability, interobserver reproducibility, and intersession reproducibility, respectively. The 4 devices offered better interobserver reproducibility than intersession reproducibility for all measurements. The CTsuperior-5 mm (midperipheral corneal thickness [MPCT], measured at superior locations with a distance of 2.5 mm from the corneal apex) measurements showed the poorest repeatability and reproducibility. The Galilei revealed the best precision of CCT, TCT, and CT2 mm measurements. Conclusions: Both Scheimpflug imaging and FD-OCT offer highly repeatable and reproducible measurements of CCT and MPCT. The precision was lower in the midperipheral superior quadrant. Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article. © 2013 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.


Chen S.,Wenzhou Medical College | Chen S.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | Huang J.,Wenzhou Medical College | Huang J.,Key Laboratory of Vision Science | And 7 more authors.
Acta Ophthalmologica | Year: 2012

Purpose: To compare the repeatability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements by high-resolution (HR) rotating Scheimpflug imaging and Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT). CCT measurements were compared to those determined by ultrasound pachymetry (UP). Methods: In 35 healthy eyes, intra-observer repeatability for HR Scheimpflug (Pentacam) and FD-OCT (RTVue) systems was determined in consecutive images taken by an observer in the shortest time possible. Imaging was repeated again by a second observer to evaluate inter-observer reproducibility. The CCT measurements were compared among Scheimpflug, FD-OCT and UP images. Results: Mean coefficients of repeatability were 0.48% for Scheimpflug and 0.26% for FD-OCT. For Scheimpflug, the coefficient of inter-operator reproducibility was 0.87%. For FD-OCT, the coefficient of inter-operator reproducibility was 0.45%. The CCT measurements by Scheimpflug, OCT and UP images were (mean ± standard deviation) 521.7 ± 27.6 μm, 510.8 ± 28.6 μm and 516.5 ± 27.6 μm, respectively. The differences between instruments were statistically significant. The 95% limits of agreement in CCT were -0.7 to 22.5 μm for Pentacam-OCT, -13.4 to 24.0 μm for Pentacam-UP and -26.7 to 15.4 μm for OCT-UP. There was a high degree of correlation between CCT measured by all 3 methods. Conclusion: Noncontact measurements of CCT with HR Scheimpflug and FD-OCT systems yielded excellent repeatability and reproducibility and can be used interchangeably. Although both devices were comparable with UP; in clinical practice, the measurements acquired by optical modalities are not directly interchangeable with UP measurements. © 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation.

Loading Key Laboratory of Vision Science collaborators
Loading Key Laboratory of Vision Science collaborators