Suppr超能文献

评估类骨质缝宽度的各种方法的等效性。

Equivalency of various methods for estimating osteoid seam width.

作者信息

Quarles L D, Lobaugh B

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.

出版信息

J Bone Miner Res. 1989 Oct;4(5):671-7. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.5650040505.

Abstract

We compared the true osteoid seam width (TOSW) as measured by a modification of the orthogonal intercept lengths with various methods of estimating seam widths, including (1) the commonly used length measurements at four equidistant points (O.Wi/4PT), (2) osteoid area divided by the osteoid perimeter (O.Ar/O/Pm) or the bone/osteoid interface (O.Ar/B.Bd), and (3) a novel method for estimating seam width defined as the osteoid area divided by the major axis of the seam (O.Ar/Axis). All methods for approximating osteoid seam width significantly exaggerated the true osteoid seam dimension by an amount that ranged from 16 to 23%. However, the relative accuracy of all methods of estimating osteoid seam width are equivalent as evidenced by the similar mean difference from the TOSW (3.4, 4.1, 5.1, and 3.8) demonstrated by O.Wi/5PT, O.Ar/Axis, O.Ar/O.Pm, O.Ar/B.Bd, respectively. Regression analysis of the various estimates of seam width on TOSW also demonstrated the equivalency of these methods. Moreover, all estimates could be employed to discriminate seams of normal dimensions from abnormally wide seams in bone specimens derived from patients with osteomalacia. Differences between the methods, however, were observed that may have practical importance. In this regard, the direct procedure of determining distance demonstrated less variance than the indirect estimate of width. As a result, the direct measurement required fewer samples (n = 13) to detect a significant difference to normal and could discriminate smaller deviations in seam width (1.7 microns) at a given sample size compared with O.Ar/Axis (n = 28; 2.9 microns), O.Ar/O.Pm (n = 42; 3.4 microns), and O.Ar/B.Bd (n = 42; n = 3.2).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

我们将通过改良的正交截距长度测量法测得的真实类骨质缝宽度(TOSW)与多种估计缝宽度的方法进行了比较,这些方法包括:(1)在四个等距点进行常用的长度测量(O.Wi/4PT);(2)类骨质面积除以类骨质周长(O.Ar/O/Pm)或骨/类骨质界面(O.Ar/B.Bd);(3)一种新的估计缝宽度的方法,定义为类骨质面积除以缝的长轴(O.Ar/Axis)。所有近似类骨质缝宽度的方法都显著夸大了真实类骨质缝尺寸,夸大幅度在16%至23%之间。然而,所有估计类骨质缝宽度的方法相对准确性相当,O.Wi/5PT、O.Ar/Axis、O.Ar/O.Pm、O.Ar/B.Bd分别与TOSW的平均差值相似(3.4、4.1、5.1和3.8)证明了这一点。缝宽度的各种估计值与TOSW的回归分析也证明了这些方法的等效性。此外,所有估计值都可用于区分骨软化症患者骨标本中正常尺寸的缝和异常宽的缝。不过,观察到各方法之间的差异可能具有实际重要性。在这方面,确定距离的直接方法比宽度的间接估计方差更小。因此,与O.Ar/Axis(n = 28;2.9微米)、O.Ar/O.Pm(n = 42;3.4微米)和O.Ar/B.Bd(n = 42;3.2微米)相比,直接测量在检测与正常情况的显著差异时所需样本更少(n = 13),并且在给定样本量下能够区分更小的缝宽度偏差(1.7微米)。(摘要截于250字)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验