ArticleJournal of bone and mineral metabolism2018
Discrete tomography in an in vivo small animal bone study.
Article in Journal of bone and mineral metabolism, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Iterative and discrete reconstruction in the evaluation of the rabbit model of osteoarthritis.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed at assessing the feasibility of a discrete algebraic reconstruction technique (DART) to be used in in vivo small animal bone studies. The advantage of discrete tomography is the possibility to reduce the amount of X-ray projection images, which makes scans faster and implies also a significant reduction of radiation dose, without compromising the reconstruction results. Bone studies are ideal for being performed with discrete tomography, due to the relatively small number of attenuation coefficients contained in the image [namely three: background (air), soft tissue and bone]. In this paper, a validation is made by comparing trabecular bone morphometric parameters calculated from images obtained by using DART and the commonly used standard filtered back-projection (FBP). Female rats were divided into an ovariectomized (OVX) and a sham-operated group. In vivo micro-CT scanning of the tibia was done at baseline and at 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks after surgery. The cross-section images were reconstructed using first the full set of projection images and afterwards reducing them in number to a quarter and one-sixth (248, 62, 42 projection images, respectively). For both reconstruction methods, similar changes in morphometric parameters were observed over time: bone loss for OVX and bone growth for sham-operated rats, although for DART the actual values were systematically higher (bone volume fraction) or lower (structure model index) compared to FBP, depending on the morphometric parameter. The DART algorithm was, however, more robust when using fewer projection images, where the standard FBP reconstruction was more prone to noise, showing a significantly bigger deviation from the morphometric parameters obtained using all projection images. This study supports the use of DART as a potential alternative method to FBP in X-ray micro-CT animal studies, in particular, when the number of projections has to be drastically minimized, which directly reduces scanning time and dose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.