Key result
An automated computer application to measure trabecular thickness from microcomputed tomographic scans demonstrated good agreement with phantom and histological section measurements.
A novel automated method for measuring trabecular thickness from muCT scans shows good agreement with histological sections, offering a nondestructive alternative for bone morphometry.
May streamline preclinical bone morphometry; leaves open clinical translation without prospective validation.
Trabeculae form the internal bony mesh work and provide strength to the bone; interconnectivity, overall density, and trabecular thickness are important measures of the integrity of the internal architecture. Such strength is achieved only gradually during ontogeny, whereby an increase in trabecular thickness precedes an increase in mineralization. Loss of bone mass later in life may be compensated for by thickening of the remaining trabeculae. These facts, and the role of trabeculae in mineral homeostasis, highlight the importance of investigating trabecular thickness within and between species. While nondestructive imaging techniques (i.e., muCT and MRI) are becoming increasingly popular, quantification of trabecular thickness using nondestructive techniques has proved difficult owing to limitations imposed by scanning parameters, uniform thresholding, and partial volume averaging. Here we present a computer application, which aims to overcome these problems. Validation is carried out against a phantom and against trabecular thickness measured in corresponding histological sections. Good agreement was found between these measurements. Furthermore, when trabecular thickness is recorded for modern human fetal ilia, a trend toward trabecular thickness increase is found and is in line with reports of ontogenetic morphometric changes using histological sections. However, there are discrepancies. These may in part be due to partial volume effects of obliquely oriented structures. More crucial, however, are problems inherent in histological sections, e.g., shrinkage and distortion, especially where differences in mineralization are concerned; this may affect biological interpretations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McColl et al. (2006) studied this question. Automated computer application for muCT scans vs. Histological sections and phantom was evaluated on Agreement of trabecular thickness measurements. An automated computer application to measure trabecular thickness from microcomputed tomographic scans demonstrated good agreement with phantom and histological section measurements.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: