MedElevator
Войти в исследования Annals of anatomy = Anatomischer Anzeiger : official organ of the Anatomische Gesellschaft · 2021
Time is bone - Quantitative comparison of decalcification solvents in human femur samples using dual-X-ray-absorptiometry and computed tomography.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gawlitza Joshua, Steinhäuser Jakob, Bücker Arno, Krasteva-Christ Gabriela, Tschernig Thomas
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Bone decalcification is a necessary preprocessing step in histological and anatomical studies. Several solutions for decalcification with different claimed times for full decalcification are commercially available. Current literature lacks direct, quantitative measurement of calcium hydrocyapatite degradation during decalcification to compare different solutions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to test the performance of three different decalcification solutions in human bone by direct measurement of calcium hydroxyapatite using dual-X-ray-absorptiometry (DEXA) and volumetric computed tomography (CT).
METHODS: Four femur slices were acquired from the proximal femur of a 76-year-old body donor. The slices were submerged in formaldehyde (control), EDTA, Osteosoft (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) and "Rapid Bone Decalcifier" (RBD) (American MasterTech Scientific, Lodi, USA). Consecutive DEXA and CT scans were performed at 2 h, 4 h, 8 h, 11 h, 20 h, 44 h and 77 h after solutions were added. Besides the calcium hydroxyapatite concentration, the bone volume was measured each time.
RESULTS: Fastest decline in volume was seen in the RBD probe. Further, RBD was the only solution, being able to fully decalcify the bone slice after 77 h. Although a steady decline in volume and hydroxyapatite concentration was seen for EDTA and Osteosoft as well, both were not able to decalcify the slices.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the purely qualititve acquired literature data on bone decalcifiers was verified by our quantitative data for human, cortical-rich bones. Hydrochloric-acid based solutions seem to be preferable in order to rapidly dissolve the calcium hydroxyapatite.
METHODS: Four femur slices were acquired from the proximal femur of a 76-year-old body donor. The slices were submerged in formaldehyde (control), EDTA, Osteosoft (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) and "Rapid Bone Decalcifier" (RBD) (American MasterTech Scientific, Lodi, USA). Consecutive DEXA and CT scans were performed at 2 h, 4 h, 8 h, 11 h, 20 h, 44 h and 77 h after solutions were added. Besides the calcium hydroxyapatite concentration, the bone volume was measured each time.
RESULTS: Fastest decline in volume was seen in the RBD probe. Further, RBD was the only solution, being able to fully decalcify the bone slice after 77 h. Although a steady decline in volume and hydroxyapatite concentration was seen for EDTA and Osteosoft as well, both were not able to decalcify the slices.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the purely qualititve acquired literature data on bone decalcifiers was verified by our quantitative data for human, cortical-rich bones. Hydrochloric-acid based solutions seem to be preferable in order to rapidly dissolve the calcium hydroxyapatite.