Journal List > Lab Anim Res > v.26(3) > 1053628

Ahn, Kim, Lee, Yang, Moon, Kim, Jung, and Kim: Morphometric Analysis of Tibial Bone in Three Strains of Mice Using Micro-computed Tomography

Abstract

This study investigated the trabecular and cortical bone microarchitecture of tibia in 14-week-old C3H/ HeN, C57BL/6J and ICR mice using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). Defined volumes of interest were scanned at a resolution of 17 µm (isotropic). The X-ray tube was set at photon energy of 50 kV, current of 200 µA, exposure time 1.2 sec, and a 0.5 mm-thick aluminium filter. For quantification of bone mineral density (BMD), the bone samples were scanned by micro-CT together with 2 calibration phantoms. The image slices were reconstructed using 3-dimensional CT analyzer software. C3H/HeN mice showed significantly higher levels of bone volume fraction, trabecular number and BMD, and lower levels of trabecular separation, structure model index and degree of anisotropy compared to C57BL/6J or ICR mice in trabecular bone area. So the C3H/HeN mouse appeared to be a good model animal for the study on the changes of trabecular bone with high trabecular bone mass.

REFERENCES

Bandstra E.R.., Pecaut M.J.., Anderson E.R.., Willey J.S.., De Carlo F.., Stock S.R.., Gridley D.S.., Nelson G.A.., Levine H.G.., Bateman T.A.2008. Longterm dose response of trabecular bone in mice to proton radiation. Radiat. Res. 169(6):607–614.
crossref
Blake G.M.., Fogelman I.2001. Bone densitometry and the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Semin. Nucl. Med. 31(1):69–81.
crossref
Boyd S.K.., Mattmann C.., Kuhn A.., Mller R.., Gasser J.A.2004. A novel approach for monitoring and predicting bone microstructure in osteoporosis. In 26th American Society of Bone and Mineral Research Annual Meeting, Seattle. J. Bone Miner. Res. S236-S237.
Eastell R.., Hannon R.A.2008. Biomarkers of bone health and osteoporosis risk. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 67(2):157–162.
crossref
Eurell J.A.., Frappier B.L.2006. Textbook of Veterinary Histology, 6th ed., pp. 46–50. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
Guldberg R.E.., Lin A.S.., Coleman R.., Robertson G.., Duvall C.2004. Microcomputed tomography imaging of skeletal development and growth. Birth Defects Res. C Embryo Today. 72(3):250–259.
crossref
Kim S.J.., Kim K.W.., Lee J.H.2000. A study on the trabecular change of femur according to 17β-estradiol dosage in ovariectomized rat. J. Korean Assoc. Maxillofac. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 22:155–163.
Klinck R.J.., Campbell G.M.., Boyd S.K.2008. Radiation effects on bone architecture in mice and rats resulting from in vivo micro-computed tomography scanning. Med. Eng. Phys. 30(7):888–895.
crossref
Mayo-Smith W.., Rosenthal D.I.1991. Radiographic appearance of osteopenia. Radiol. Clin. North Am. 29(1):37–47.

Figure 1.
Micro-CT images of the tibia of 14-week-old C3H/HeN mice. Cross sectional view (A), vertical view (B) and reconstructed three-dimensional image (C) are represented.
lar-26-315f1.tif
Table 1.
Microstructural properties of the proximal tibial metaphyseal trabecular bone in three strains of mice
Parameter C3H/HeN C57BL/6J ICR
BV/TV (%) 15.72±4.49a 6.29±1.39b 5.50±2.70b
Tb.Th (µm) 69.92±2.57a 63.80±7.02a0 77.32±6.37c0
Tb.N (1/mm) 02.24±0.57a 0.98±0.11b 0.70±0.31b
Tb.Sp (µm) 275±37a 391±26b0 603±150b
Tb.Pf (1/mm) 09.83±4.97a 23.79±2.89b0 19.70±4.73b0
SMI 01.45±0.24a 2.13±0.08b 2.09±0.15b
DA 02.95±0.37a 3.51±0.52a 3.38±0.25b
BMD (mg/cm3) 318±70a 14±8b0 54±11c

Data are expressed as means±SD (n=6). BV/TV, bone volume/ tissue volume; Tb.Th, trabecular thickness; Tb.N, trabecular number; Tb.Sp, trabecular separation; Tb.Pf, trabecular bone pattern factor; SMI, structure model index; DA, degree of anisotropy; BMD, bone mineral density.

a,b,c Values with different superscripts in the same parameter are significantly different (P<0.05).

Table 2.
Microstructural properties of the tibial diaphyseal cortical bone in three strains of mice
Parameter C3H/HeN C57BL/6J ICR
BV (mm3) 0.72±0.04a 0.52±0.02b 1.01±0.01c
Po (%) 2.06±1.35a 0.47±0.44b 1.54±0.26a
pMOI (mm4) 0.22±0.02a 0.36±0.03b 0.74±0.22c

Data are expressed as means±SD (n=6). BV, bone volume; Po, percent porosity; pMOI, polar moment of inertia.

a,b,c Values with different superscripts in the same parameter are significantly different (P<0.05).

Table 3.
Microstructural properties of the tibial bone in ovariectomized and sham C3H/HeN mice
Parameter Sham Ovariectomy
Trabecular bone    
BV/TV (%) 17.54±4.050 3.95±1.49
Tb.Th (µm) 80.55±6.900 64.49±6.500
Tb.N (1/mm) 2.19±0.51 0.60±0.18
Tb.Sp (µm) 307±560 523±760
Tb.Pf (1/mm) 8.36±2.91 23.46±4.260
SMI 1.44±0.20 2.12±0.10
DA 3.06±0.34 4.16±0.93
BMD (mg/cm3) 336±600 97±27
Cortical bone    
BV (mm3) 0.77±0.04 0.75±0.08
Po (%) 2.18±1.26 2.84±0.98
pMOI (mm4) 0.25±0.02 0.26±0.04

Data are expressed as means±SD (n=6). BV/TV, bone volume/ tissue volume; Tb.Th, trabecular thickness; Tb.N, trabecular number; Tb.Sp, trabecular separation; Tb.Pf, trabecular bone pattern factor; SMI, structure model index; DA, degree of anisotropy; BMD, bone mineral density; BV, bone volume; Po, percent porosity; pMOI, polar moment of inertia.

Significant difference between ovariectomy and sham at P<0.05.

TOOLS
Similar articles