Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 5, 2025
06:59
Author Spotlight: An Economic and Efficient Method for Quantitative Evaluation of Bone Microarchitecture in a Murine Osteoporosis Model
Published on: September 8, 2023
3.1K
Quantification of 3D microstructural parameters of trabecular bone is affected by the analysis software
Karen Mys1, Peter Varga2, Filip Stockmans3
1Biomechanics Section, Mechanical Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; AO Research Institute Davos, Davos, Switzerland.
Bone
|October 15, 2020
Summary
Software used to analyze bone microstructural parameters significantly impacts results, except for bone volume fraction. Different packages yield varying outcomes for trabecular thickness, separation, and number, necessitating specific correction factors or a universal standard.
Area of Science:
- Biomedical Engineering
- Radiology
- Orthopedics
Background:
- High-resolution imaging is crucial for assessing bone microstructural parameters.
- Current quantification methods lack standardization, leading to variable results.
- The impact of evaluation software on bone parameter quantification remains under-investigated.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare bone microstructural parameters derived from two commercial software packages: IPL and CTan.
- To investigate the hypothesis that different software packages yield different results even from identical segmented scans.
Main Methods:
- Nineteen trapezia and nineteen distal radii were scanned using microCT (20 μm) and HR-pQCT (60 μm).
- Scans were segmented using default protocols and analyzed with both IPL and CTan software.
- Quantified parameters included bone volume fraction (BV/TV), trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), trabecular separation (Tb.Sp), trabecular number (Tb.N), and specific bone surface (BS/BV).
Main Results:
- Bone volume fraction (BV/TV) showed minimal differences between IPL and CTan.
- High correlations (R² ≥ 0.99) were found for Tb.Th, Tb.Sp, and BS/BV, but with significant relative offsets (e.g., ~15% for Tb.Th).
- Offsets varied with voxel size and anatomical location for HR-pQCT scans; Tb.N showed poor correlations (0.43 ≤ R² ≤ 0.81) between software.
Conclusions:
- IPL and CTan software produce non-comparable results for most bone microstructural parameters, except BV/TV.
- Correction factors for Tb.Th, Tb.Sp, and BS/BV are feasible but depend on image resolution and anatomical site.
- Inconsistent data for Tb.N highlights the need for a universal standard in bone microstructural analysis.
