Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of histomorphometrical data obtained with two different image analysis methods

  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A common way to determine tissue acceptance of biomaterials is to perform histomorphometrical analysis on histologically stained sections from retrieved samples with surrounding tissue, using various methods. The “time and money consuming” methods and techniques used are often “in house standards”. We address light microscopic investigations of bone tissue reactions on un-decalcified cut and ground sections of threaded implants. In order to screen sections and generate results faster, the aim of this pilot project was to compare results generated with the in-house standard visual image analysis tool (i.e., quantifications and judgements done by the naked eye) with a custom made automatic image analysis program. The histomorphometrical bone area measurements revealed no significant differences between the methods but the results of the bony contacts varied significantly. The raw results were in relative agreement, i.e., the values from the two methods were proportional to each other: low bony contact values in the visual method corresponded to low values with the automatic method. With similar resolution images and further improvements of the automatic method this difference should become insignificant. A great advantage using the new automatic image analysis method is that it is time saving—analysis time can be significantly reduced.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. C. B. JOHANSSON and P. MORBERG, Biomaterials. 16 (1995) 91

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. C. B. JOHANSSON, On tissue reactions to metal implants. PhD. Thesis, University of Göteborg, Biomaterials Group / Department of Handicap Research, Göteborg, Sweden (1991)

  3. K. DONATH, Der Präparator 34 (1988) 197

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. LINDBLAD and E. BENGTSSON, in Proceedings of the 12th SCIA Scandinavian Conference on Image Analysis, Norway, June 2001, edited by I. Austvoll (NOBIM, 2001), p. 264

  5. J. C. BEZDEK and R. J. HATHAWAY, in Proceedings of the 1st Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, IEEE, Conf. on Evolutionary Computation, June 1994; edited by Z. Michalewicz et al. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1994) p. 589.

  6. L. BALLERINI, L. BOCCHI and C. B. JOHANSSON, in Proceedings Application of Evolutionary Computation, LNCS 3005, 260-269, Portugal 2004

  7. R. C. GONZALEZ and R. E. WOODS, in “Digital image processing” (2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2001) p. 649

  8. G. BORGEFORS, Comput. Vision. Graph. 34 (1986) 344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. L. VINCENT and P. SOILLE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, IEEE. Trans. Pattern Recognit. Mach. Intel. 13 (1991) 583

  10. P. BOLIND, On 606 retrieved oral and craniofacial implants. An analysis of consecutively received human specimens. PhD. Thesis, University of Göteborg, Department of Biomaterials /Handicap Research, Göteborg, Sweden (2004)

  11. L.V. CARLSSON, On the development of a new concept for orthopaedic implant fixation. PhD Thesis, University of Göteborg, Biomaterials Group, Department of Handicap Research, Göteborg, Sweden (1989)

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research technicians Petra Johansson and Maria Hoffman, Department of Biomaterials/Handicap Research, Göteborg University, are greatly acknowledged for their skill in the cutting and grinding- and image acquisition techniques. Dr. Joakim Lindblad, Centre for Image Analysis, Uppsala, is gladly acknowledged for sharing his algorithms and for very fruitful suggestions. This work was supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council, no 621-2005-3402.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Medicine/Medical Technology, Örebro University, SE 70182, Orebro, Sweden

    Lucia Ballerini & Carina B. Johansson

  2. Centre for Image Analysis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden

    Gunilla Borgefors

  3. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry/Dental Materials Science, Inst. of Odontology and Department of Biomaterials, Inst. of Surgical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy at Göteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden

    Victoria Franke-Stenport

Authors
  1. Lucia Ballerini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victoria Franke-Stenport
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gunilla Borgefors
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carina B. Johansson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carina B. Johansson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ballerini, L., Franke-Stenport, V., Borgefors, G. et al. Comparison of histomorphometrical data obtained with two different image analysis methods. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 18, 1471–1479 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-007-0150-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-007-0150-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation