ArticlePloS one2023
Analysis of fixation materials in micro-CT: It doesn't always have to be styrofoam.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of amalgam dental filling on radiotherapy of head and neck cancer: In vivo dosimetry and dose calculation using AAA and Acuros algorithms.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Article
- An enteric ultrastructural surface atlas of the model insectiScience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Good fixation of filigree specimens for micro-CT examinations is often a challenge. Movement artefacts, over-radiation or even crushing of the specimen can easily occur. Since different specimens have different requirements, we scanned, analysed and compared 19 possible fixation materials under the same conditions in the micro-CT. We focused on radiodensity, porosity and reversibility of these fixation materials. Furthermore, we have made sure that all materials are cheap and easily available. The scans were performed with a SkyScan 1173 micro-CT. All dry fixation materials tested were punched into 5 mm diameter cylinders and clamped into 0.2 ml reaction vessels. A voxel size of 5.33 μm was achieved in a 180° scan in 0.3° steps. Ideally, fixation materials should not be visible in the reconstructed image, i.e., barely binarised. Besides common micro-CT fixation materials such as styrofoam (-935 Hounsfield Units) or Basotect foam (-943 Hounsfield Units), polyethylene air cushions (-944 Hounsfield Units), Micropor foam (-926 Hounsfield Units) and polyurethane foam, (-960 Hounsfield Units to -470 Hounsfield Units) have proved to be attractive alternatives. Furthermore, more radiopaque materials such as paraffin wax granulate (-640 Hounsfield Units) and epoxy resin (-190 Hounsfield Units) are also suitable as fixation materials. These materials often can be removed in the reconstructed image by segmentation. Sample fixations in the studies of recent years are almost all limited to fixation in Parafilm, Styrofoam, or Basotect foam if the fixation type is mentioned at all. However, these are not always useful, as styrofoam, for example, dissolves in some common media such as methylsalicylate. We show that micro-CT laboratories should be equipped with various fixation materials to achieve high-level image quality.
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.