Suppr超能文献

毛细血管基底膜厚度测量方法的比较。塌陷椭圆技术。

Comparison of measurement methods for capillary basement membrane thickness. Collapsed-ellipse technique.

作者信息

Katz M A, Beggs J L, Johnson P C

出版信息

Diabetes. 1987 Sep;36(9):1019-28. doi: 10.2337/diab.36.9.1019.

Abstract

Both the grid method of Siperstein et al. (tSIP) and the minimum-points method of Williamson et al. (tWIL) for measurement of capillary basement membrane thickness are inaccurate for assessing mean true membrane thickness of a give section (tTRUE) for various reasons, including errors in selectivity, sensitivity, and geometry. In general, it is agreed that tSIP greater than tTRUE greater than tWIL, but estimates of tTRUE beyond this have not been made. In this study, a collapsed-ellipse method for approximating tTRUE is presented that measures thickness by areas (tEA). One hundred-twenty capillaries from the forearm skin of 12 diabetic subjects and 12 age-matched controls were measured to examine these concepts. We found that, whereas tWIL was up to 63% below tTRUE, tEA was less than 30% too low. Although tSIP, tWIL, and tEA did not distinguish between diabetic and normal subjects, tEA and tWIL measurements had highly predictable and small errors, and tSIP had unpredictable ranges of error, especially when tSIP was low.

摘要

Siperstein等人的网格法(tSIP)和Williamson等人的最小点法(tWIL)用于测量毛细血管基底膜厚度时,由于包括选择性、敏感性和几何形状方面的误差等各种原因,对于评估给定切片的平均真实膜厚度(tTRUE)而言并不准确。一般来说,人们一致认为tSIP大于tTRUE大于tWIL,但除此之外尚未对tTRUE进行估计。在本研究中,提出了一种用于近似tTRUE的塌陷椭圆法,该方法通过面积测量厚度(tEA)。对12名糖尿病受试者和12名年龄匹配的对照者的前臂皮肤中的120根毛细血管进行测量以检验这些概念。我们发现,虽然tWIL比tTRUE低达63%,但tEA低了不到30%。尽管tSIP、tWIL和tEA无法区分糖尿病患者和正常受试者,但tEA和tWIL测量具有高度可预测且较小的误差,而tSIP具有不可预测的误差范围,尤其是当tSIP较低时。

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