Cargando…
Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples?
This study aims to evaluate the grid of Merz and ImageJ methods for histometric quantification, verifying which is more reliable and defining which is most suitable based on the time required to perform. Thirty histological samples of maxillary sinuses grafted with xenografts were evaluated using an...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9611878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36295525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101364 |
_version_ | 1784819636252966912 |
---|---|
author | Pereira, Rodrigo dos Santos Mourão, Carlos Fernando Piattelli, Adriano Romanos, Georgios E. Coelho Mendes, Bruno Giubilato, Flavio Montemezzi, Pietro Júnior Conforte, Jadson Griza, Geraldo Luiz Bonardi, João Paulo Hochuli-Vieira, Eduardo |
author_facet | Pereira, Rodrigo dos Santos Mourão, Carlos Fernando Piattelli, Adriano Romanos, Georgios E. Coelho Mendes, Bruno Giubilato, Flavio Montemezzi, Pietro Júnior Conforte, Jadson Griza, Geraldo Luiz Bonardi, João Paulo Hochuli-Vieira, Eduardo |
author_sort | Pereira, Rodrigo dos Santos |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study aims to evaluate the grid of Merz and ImageJ methods for histometric quantification, verifying which is more reliable and defining which is most suitable based on the time required to perform. Thirty histological samples of maxillary sinuses grafted with xenografts were evaluated using an optical light microscope attached to an image capture camera and connected to a microcomputer. The images were digitalized and recorded as a TIFF image, and the new bone formation was evaluated using the grid of Merz and ImageJ. The Bland–Altman analysis was used to identify the agreement between the methods and determine suitable future research options. The timing of the quantification was also performed to identify a possible advantage. The mean value for the quantification analysis timing for the grid of Merz was 194.9 ± 72.0 s and for ImageJ was 871.7 ± 264.4, with statistical significance between the groups (p = 0.0001). The Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated a concordance between the methods, due to the bias being next to the maximum concordance (−1.25) in addition to the graphic showing the scattering points next to the mean of differences and inside of limits of agreement. Thus, it was demonstrated that the grid of Merz presents reliable outcomes and advantages over the ImageJ methodology regarding the time spent to contour the areas of interest. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9611878 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96118782022-10-28 Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? Pereira, Rodrigo dos Santos Mourão, Carlos Fernando Piattelli, Adriano Romanos, Georgios E. Coelho Mendes, Bruno Giubilato, Flavio Montemezzi, Pietro Júnior Conforte, Jadson Griza, Geraldo Luiz Bonardi, João Paulo Hochuli-Vieira, Eduardo Medicina (Kaunas) Article This study aims to evaluate the grid of Merz and ImageJ methods for histometric quantification, verifying which is more reliable and defining which is most suitable based on the time required to perform. Thirty histological samples of maxillary sinuses grafted with xenografts were evaluated using an optical light microscope attached to an image capture camera and connected to a microcomputer. The images were digitalized and recorded as a TIFF image, and the new bone formation was evaluated using the grid of Merz and ImageJ. The Bland–Altman analysis was used to identify the agreement between the methods and determine suitable future research options. The timing of the quantification was also performed to identify a possible advantage. The mean value for the quantification analysis timing for the grid of Merz was 194.9 ± 72.0 s and for ImageJ was 871.7 ± 264.4, with statistical significance between the groups (p = 0.0001). The Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated a concordance between the methods, due to the bias being next to the maximum concordance (−1.25) in addition to the graphic showing the scattering points next to the mean of differences and inside of limits of agreement. Thus, it was demonstrated that the grid of Merz presents reliable outcomes and advantages over the ImageJ methodology regarding the time spent to contour the areas of interest. MDPI 2022-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9611878/ /pubmed/36295525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101364 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Pereira, Rodrigo dos Santos Mourão, Carlos Fernando Piattelli, Adriano Romanos, Georgios E. Coelho Mendes, Bruno Giubilato, Flavio Montemezzi, Pietro Júnior Conforte, Jadson Griza, Geraldo Luiz Bonardi, João Paulo Hochuli-Vieira, Eduardo Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? |
title | Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? |
title_full | Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? |
title_fullStr | Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? |
title_full_unstemmed | Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? |
title_short | Which Histometric Analysis Approach Is More Reliable for Assessing Histological Bone Tissue Samples? |
title_sort | which histometric analysis approach is more reliable for assessing histological bone tissue samples? |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9611878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36295525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina58101364 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pereirarodrigodossantos whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT mouraocarlosfernando whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT piattelliadriano whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT romanosgeorgiose whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT coelhomendesbruno whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT giubilatoflavio whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT montemezzipietro whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT juniorconfortejadson whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT grizageraldoluiz whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT bonardijoaopaulo whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples AT hochulivieiraeduardo whichhistometricanalysisapproachismorereliableforassessinghistologicalbonetissuesamples |