Gielkens Pepijn F M, Schortinghuis Jurjen, de Jong Johan R, Huysmans Marie Charlotte D N J M, Leeuwen M Barbara M van, Raghoebar Gerry M, Bos Ruud R M, Stegenga Boudewijn
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
Arch Oral Biol. 2008 Jun;53(6):558-66. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2007.11.011. Epub 2008 Jan 10.
Intraobserver reliability and agreement were determined for microradiography (MR), micro-computed tomography (microCT) and histomorphometry (HM). These three modalities were compared for quantitative measurements of bone formation and graft modelling in rat mandibular defects and grafts.
Twelve rats were randomly selected from a larger experiment, evaluating bone formation in rat mandibular defects and bone modelling in grafts. Twelve lateral microradiographs were taken of the grafts. microCT images were obtained from all defects and grafts (24 specimens). Defects and grafts were cut perpendicularly through their centre. Microradiographs, microCT images and histological sections were obtained from the resulting 48 specimens. New bone volume and graft volume were measured using image analysis software on MR and microCT images. Defect width and graft width were measured using images from HM, MR and microCT. The results were compared to each other.
The intraobserver reliabilities for the measurements of new bone volume by microCT, and the measurement of graft modelling by MR and graft volume by microCT were high. The differences between MR, HM and microCT were larger in defect width measurements than in graft width measurement. MR measured smaller defects than HM and microCT. The 95% confidence interval was larger in defect width measurements compared to graft width measurements.
The methods of MR and microCT image analysis are reliable but preferably should be used in combination as to obtain valid conclusions. HM, MR and microCT for graft widths measurements showed more agreement than for defect width measurements. MR appears to overestimate bone formation.
确定显微放射ography（MR）、显微计算机断层扫描（microCT）和组织形态计量学（HM）的观察者内可靠性和一致性。比较这三种方法对大鼠下颌骨缺损和移植物中骨形成和移植物建模的定量测量。
从一个更大的实验中随机选择12只大鼠，评估大鼠下颌骨缺损中的骨形成和移植物中的骨建模。对移植物拍摄12张侧位显微放射照片。从所有缺损和移植物（24个标本）中获取microCT图像。将缺损和移植物沿其中心垂直切开。从得到的48个标本中获取显微放射照片、microCT图像和组织学切片。使用图像分析软件在MR和microCT图像上测量新骨体积和移植物体积。使用HM、MR和microCT的图像测量缺损宽度和移植物宽度。将结果相互比较。
microCT测量新骨体积、MR测量移植物建模以及microCT测量移植物体积的观察者内可靠性较高。在缺损宽度测量中，MR、HM和microCT之间的差异大于移植物宽度测量中的差异。MR测量的缺损比HM和microCT小。与移植物宽度测量相比，缺损宽度测量的95%置信区间更大。
MR和microCT图像分析方法是可靠的，但最好结合使用以获得有效的结论。HM、MR和microCT在移植物宽度测量上的一致性高于缺损宽度测量。MR似乎高估了骨形成。
