Mandal Shibarjun, Motganhalli Ravikumar Ramya, Tannert Astrid, Urbanek Annett, Guliev Rustam R, Naumann Max, Coldewey Sina M, Dahmen Uta, Carvalho Lina, Bastião Silva Luís, Neugebauer Ute
Leibniz Institute of Photonic Technology (Member of Leibniz Health Technologies, Member of the Leibniz Centre for Photonics in Infection Research, LPI), 07745, Jena, Germany.
Center for Sepsis Control and Care, Jena University Hospital, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 7;15(1):1153. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-84330-2.
Bone tissue, with its complex structure, often necessitates decalcification of the hard tissue for ex vivo morphological studies. The choice of a suitable decalcification method plays a crucial role in preserving desired features and ensuring compatibility with diverse imaging techniques. The search for a universal decalcification method that is suitable for a range of biophotonic analyses remains an ongoing challenge. In this study, we systematically assessed five standard bone decalcification protocols, encompassing strong mineralic acids (3% and 5% nitric acid), a commercially available formulation of hydrochloric and formic acid), as well as weak organic acids (5% trichloroacetic acid and 8% formic acid), and a chelating agent (25% ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid) with varying decalcification durations, using mouse long bones as our experimental model. Our imaging analysis panel included classical histological staining (Hematoxylin and Eosin, H&E), immunofluorescence staining, and label-free Raman microspectroscopic imaging. We used cryosections instead of paraffin sections since paraffin interferes with tissue Raman signals. This approach is not as commonly used as it is more prone to handling artifacts, but is the preferred method for subsequent Raman analysis. Decalcification efficacy was evaluated based on various qualitative and some quantitative imaging parameters by 2-3 independent observers. Our systematic approach revealed that the chelating agent, when used for 24 h, optimally preserved bone features and, thus, would be the ideal decalcifying agent for comprehensive subsequent analysis. However, the choice of decalcifier and the ideal decalcification duration may vary depending on the type and thickness of bone, necessitating tailored adjustments to meet specific experimental requirements.
骨组织结构复杂,在进行体外形态学研究时,通常需要对硬组织进行脱钙处理。选择合适的脱钙方法对于保留所需特征以及确保与多种成像技术的兼容性起着至关重要的作用。寻找一种适用于一系列生物光子分析的通用脱钙方法仍然是一个持续存在的挑战。在本研究中,我们以小鼠长骨为实验模型,系统评估了五种标准的骨脱钙方案,包括强无机酸(3%和5%硝酸)、一种市售的盐酸和甲酸配方、弱酸(5%三氯乙酸和8%甲酸)以及一种螯合剂(25%乙二胺四乙酸),脱钙时间各不相同。我们的成像分析方法包括经典组织学染色(苏木精和伊红染色,H&E)、免疫荧光染色和无标记拉曼显微光谱成像。我们使用冰冻切片而非石蜡切片,因为石蜡会干扰组织拉曼信号。这种方法不像石蜡切片那样常用,因为它更容易产生操作伪像,但却是后续拉曼分析的首选方法。由2至3名独立观察者根据各种定性和一些定量成像参数评估脱钙效果。我们的系统方法表明,螯合剂在使用24小时时能最佳地保留骨特征,因此将是后续综合分析的理想脱钙剂。然而,脱钙剂的选择和理想的脱钙时间可能因骨的类型和厚度而异,需要进行针对性调整以满足特定的实验要求。