Image interpolation allows accurate quantitative bone morphometry in registered micro-computed tomography scans

Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 539-548

  Schulte, Friederike A ^a   Lambers, Floor M ^a   Mueller, Thomas L ^a   Stauber, Martin ^a,b   Müller, Ralph ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b B cube AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

bone morphometry; image registration; in vivo micro computed tomography; interpolation; post processing

Indexed keywords

BONE; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGE REGISTRATION;

BONE MICROARCHITECTURE; BONE MORPHOMETRY; IMAGE INTERPOLATIONS; IN-VIVO; MICROCOMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSIS; POST PROCESSING; SPATIAL MISALIGNMENTS;

INTERPOLATION;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; IMAGE INTERPOLATION; IMAGING AND DISPLAY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MICRO-COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; OSTEOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ANIMALS; BONE AND BONES; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; SPINE; X-RAY MICROTOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84896527211     PISSN: 10255842     EISSN: 14768259     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2012.699526     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. BlumenfeldJ, StudholmeC, Carballido-GamioJ, CarpenterD, LinkTM, MajumdarS. 2008. Three-dimensional image registration of MR proximal femur images for the analysis of trabecular bone parameters. Med Phys. 35(10):4630-4639.
2. BouxseinML, BoydSK, ChristiansenBA, GuldbergRE, JepsenKJ, MullerR. 2010. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res. 25(7):1468-1486.
3. BoydSK, DavisonP, MüllerR, GasserJA. 2006. Monitoring individual morphological changes over time in ovariectomized rats by in vivo micro-computed tomography. Bone. 39(4):854-862.
4. BoydSK, MoserS, KuhnM, KlinckRJ, KrauzePL, MüllerR, GasserJA. 2006. Evaluation of three-dimensional image registration methodologies for in vivo micro-computed tomography. Ann Biomed Eng. 34(10):1587-1599.
5. BrouwersJEM, van RietbergenB, HuiskesR, ItoK. 2009. Effects of PTH treatment on tibial bone of ovariectomized rats assessed by in vivo micro-CT. Osteoporos Int20(11):1823-1835.
6. GasserJA, IngoldP, GrosiusK, LaibA, HämmerleS, KollerB. 2005. Non-invasive monitoring of changes in structural cancellous bone parameters with a novel prototype microCT. J Bone Miner Metab. 23(Suppl.): 90-96.
7. GlüerCC, BlakeG, LuY, BluntBA, JergasM, GenantHK. 1995. Accurate assessment of precision errors: how to measure the reproducibility of bone densitometry techniques. Osteoporos Int. 5(4):262-270.
8. HildebrandT, LaibA, MüllerR, DequekerJ, RüegseggerP. 1999. Direct three-dimensional morphometric analysis of human cancellous bone: microstructural data from spine, femur, iliac crest, and calcaneus. J Bone Miner Res. 14(7):1167-1174.
9. HildebrandT, RüegseggerP. 1997a. A new method for the model-independent assessment of thickness in three-dimensional images. J Microsc. 185:67-75.
10. HildebrandT, RüegseggerP. 1997b. Quantification of bone microarchitecture with the structure model index. Comput Meth Biomech Biomed Eng. 1(1):15-23.
11. KochG. 1982. Intraclass correlation coefficient. In: Encyclopedia of statistical sciences. New York: Wiley. p. 213-217.
12. KohlerT, BeyelerM, WebsterD, MüllerR. 2005. Compartmental bone morphometry in the mouse femur: reproducibility and resolution dependence of microtomographic measurements. Calcified Tissue Int. 77(5):281-290.
13. KohlerT, StauberM, DonahueLR, MüllerR. 2007. Automated compartmental analysis for high-throughput skeletal phenotyping in femora of genetic mouse models. Bone. 41(4):659-667.
14. LambersFM, SchulteFA, KuhnG, WebsterDJ, MullerR. 2011. Mouse tail vertebrae adapt to cyclic mechanical loading by increasing bone formation rate and decreasing bone resorption rate as shown by time-lapsed in vivo imaging of dynamic bone morphometry. Bone, 10.1016/j.bone.2011.08.035.
15. MacNeilJA, BoydSK. 2008. Improved reproducibility of high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography for measurement of bone quality. Med Eng Phys. 30(6):792-799.
16. MaesF, VandermeulenD, SuetensP. 1999. Comparative evaluation of multiresolution optimization strategies for multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. Med Image Anal. 3(4):373-386.
17. MeijeringEHW, NiessenWJ, PluimJPW, ViergeverMA. 1999. Quantitative comparison of sinc-approximating kernels for medical image interpolation. Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention - MICCAI'99, C.Taylor and A.Colchester (eds.), vol 1679of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 210-217.
18. MuellerTL, StauberM, KohlerT, EcksteinF, MüllerR, van LentheGH. 2009. Non-invasive bone competence analysis by high-resolution pQCT: an in vitro reproducibility study on structural and mechanical properties at the human radius. Bone. 44(2):364-371.
19. NishiyamaKK, CampbellGM, KlinckRJ, BoydSK. 2010. Reproducibility of bone micro-architecture measurements in rodents by in vivo micro-computed tomography is maximized with three-dimensional image registration. Bone. 46(1):155-161.
20. OdgaardA. 1997. Three-dimensional methods for quantification of cancellous bone architecture. Bone. 20(4):315-328.
21. OdgaardA, JensenEB, GundersenHJ. 1990. Estimation of structural anisotropy based on volume orientation. A new concept. J Microsc. 157(Pt 2):149-162.
22. R Development Core Team. 2007. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
23. SchulteFA, LambersFM, KuhnG, MüllerR. 2011. In vivo micro-computed tomography allows direct three-dimensional quantification of both bone formation and bone resorption parameters using time-lapsed imaging. Bone. 48(3):433-442.
24. StudholmeC, HillDL, HawkesDJ. 1997. Automated three-dimensional registration of magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography brain images by multiresolution optimization of voxel similarity measures. Med Phys. 24(1):25-35.
25. ThevenazP, BluT, UnserM. 2000. Interpolation revisited. IEEE Transact Med Imag. 19(7):739-758.
26. ThevenazP, RuttimannUE, UnserM. 1998. A pyramid approach to subpixel registration based on intensity. IEEE Trans Image Process. 7(1):27-41.
27. WaarsingJH, DayJS, van der LindenJC, EderveenAG, SpanjersC, De ClerckN, SasovA, VerhaarJAN, WeinansH. 2004. Detecting and tracking local changes in the tibiae of individual rats: a novel method to analyse longitudinal in vivo micro-CT data. Bone. 34(1):163-169.