2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Comparative 3D micro-CT and 2D histomorphometry analysis of dental implant osseointegration in the maxilla of minipigs

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography.

            Use of high-resolution micro-computed tomography (microCT) imaging to assess trabecular and cortical bone morphology has grown immensely. There are several commercially available microCT systems, each with different approaches to image acquisition, evaluation, and reporting of outcomes. This lack of consistency makes it difficult to interpret reported results and to compare findings across different studies. This article addresses this critical need for standardized terminology and consistent reporting of parameters related to image acquisition and analysis, and key outcome assessments, particularly with respect to ex vivo analysis of rodent specimens. Thus the guidelines herein provide recommendations regarding (1) standardized terminology and units, (2) information to be included in describing the methods for a given experiment, and (3) a minimal set of outcome variables that should be reported. Whereas the specific research objective will determine the experimental design, these guidelines are intended to ensure accurate and consistent reporting of microCT-derived bone morphometry and density measurements. In particular, the methods section for papers that present microCT-based outcomes must include details of the following scan aspects: (1) image acquisition, including the scanning medium, X-ray tube potential, and voxel size, as well as clear descriptions of the size and location of the volume of interest and the method used to delineate trabecular and cortical bone regions, and (2) image processing, including the algorithms used for image filtration and the approach used for image segmentation. Morphometric analyses should be based on 3D algorithms that do not rely on assumptions about the underlying structure whenever possible. When reporting microCT results, the minimal set of variables that should be used to describe trabecular bone morphometry includes bone volume fraction and trabecular number, thickness, and separation. The minimal set of variables that should be used to describe cortical bone morphometry includes total cross-sectional area, cortical bone area, cortical bone area fraction, and cortical thickness. Other variables also may be appropriate depending on the research question and technical quality of the scan. Standard nomenclature, outlined in this article, should be followed for reporting of results. 2010 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Bone histomorphometry: standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units. Report of the ASBMR Histomorphometry Nomenclature Committee.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Journal of Clinical Periodontology
                J Clin Periodontol
                Wiley
                03036979
                April 2017
                April 2017
                February 27 2017
                : 44
                : 4
                : 418-427
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery; Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München; Munich Germany
                [2 ]Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery; Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich; Munich Germany
                [3 ]Department of Osteology and Biomechanics; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf; Hamburg Germany
                [4 ]Institute of Molecular Immunology - Experimental Oncology; Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München; Munich Germany
                Article
                10.1111/jcpe.12693
                6f01d9ad-4e2b-427d-999a-321fe1b23911
                © 2017

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article