Abstract
BackgroundHistology is considered as a gold standard for analyzing bone architecture. However, histomorphometry is a destructive method and only offers the bone information of a limited location. Micro-computed tomography (μCT) is a non-destructive technology and provides a slice at any site. The aim of this study was to compare the correlation of the Bone-to-Implant Contact ratio (BIC) between 2D micro-CT (μCT) and histomorphometry and to investigate a method for assessing the osseointegration of the implant by 2D μCT.MethodsA total of 18 implants were divided into three groups (6 implants per group), and inserted into the rabbit tibia defects as follow: implant only (Implant group), implant with β-TCP/hydrogel (TCP group), implant with rhBMP-2 loaded β-TCP/hydrogel composite (BMP-2 group). After 4 weeks of implantation, the specimens were collected to take the micro-CT scan with an aluminum filter and performed H&E staining on the undecalcified sections. The 2D μCT slices were chosen at an angle of 0°, 45°, 90° and 135° with the representative histological section to measure BIC. And the correlations between BICs of 2D μCT and BICs of histology were evaluated.ResultsIn each group, BICs at the same sites measured by histomorphometry and corresponding 2D μCT presented the same trend and shown no significant difference between the two methods (P > 0.05). BICs of histological sections and BICs of corresponding 2D μCT slices presented a strong correlation in the implant group (γ = 0.74, P = 0.09), a moderate correlation in the TCP group (γ = 0.46, P = 0.35), a weak correlation in the BMP-2 group (γ = 0.30, P = 0.56). In the implant group, the relationship between BIC-Mean-μCTs and BICs-Histology has presented a significant linear correlation (γ = 0.84, P = 0.04).ConclusionsIntegrating bone information of several 2D μCT slices in different sites to measure BIC is a feasible method for assessing the implant osseointegration.
Highlights
Histology is considered as a gold standard for analyzing bone architecture
The 2D μCT slice matching with the representative histological section was named 0°-μCT
There was no significant difference between the Bone-to-Implant Contact ratio (BIC) obtained by histology and 2D μCT in each group (P > 0.05) (Table 1)
Summary
Histology is considered as a gold standard for analyzing bone architecture. Histomorphometry is a destructive method and only offers the bone information of a limited location. Micro-computed tomography (μCT) is a non-destructive technology and provides a slice at any site. The aim of this study was to compare the correlation of the Bone-to-Implant Contact ratio (BIC) between 2D micro-CT (μCT) and histomorphometry and to investigate a method for assessing the osseointegration of the implant by 2D μCT. Histomorphometry is considered as the gold standard for analyzing the BIC [4]. A few representative cross-sections in the specific position of the implant is obtained by histological section and insufficient to provide the overall information of the implant [4,5,6]. The specimen after the histomorphometry cannot be used for the other assessments
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
