Literature DB >> 14514995

Bone mineral measurements in mice: comparison of two devices.

Sami Kolta1, Marie-Christine De Vernejoul, Pierre Meneton, Jacques Fechtenbaum, Christian Roux.   

Abstract

Animal models are widely used to explore the pathogenesis and management of osteoporosis. Mice are increasingly being used in animal models. We have evaluated the precision, accuracy, and ability to monitor changes in bone mineral measurements of mice with the Piximus and Hologic QDR 2000 devices. One hundred and twenty-two C57/BL6 mice were used in this study; 70 of them were put on a low calcium diet and followed prospectively for 14 wk. They were measured using both devices at baseline and at wk 14. Using the Piximus, we measured the whole body, the tibia, and two caudal vertebrae. Using the Hologic, we measured the tibia, which we divided into three equal parts. The remaining mice were used to evaluate the precision and accuracy of the measurement. The accuracy, which was determined only for the Hologic device, revealed a mean difference between the in vivo bone mineral content (BMC) and the ash weight of 0.1 mg. The precision, evaluated from the coefficient of variation (%) and the Smallest Detectable Difference (SDD, in absolute values) was good for both devices, confirming their ability to detect small differences in longitudinal studies: as little as 0.004 g for the BMC of the total tibia on both devices, and 0.003 g/cm2 for whole body bone mineral density (BMD) on the Piximus. The BMC found using the two devices was comparable, whereas the BMD obtained on the Hologic device was nearly double that found using the Piximus. The comparison of the results by Bland and Altman's method showed that the difference between the results was not dependent on the magnitude of the measurement. We concluded that bone density and bone-density changes in mice can be measured precisely in vivo using the Hologic and Piximus devices; the latter being able to measure the whole body BMD with good precision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14514995     DOI: 10.1385/jcd:6:3:251

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Densitom        ISSN: 1094-6950            Impact factor:   2.963


  6 in total

1.  Comparison of software versions for body composition analysis using the PIXImus dual-energy X-ray absorptiometer.

Authors:  M S Johnson; N M Landy; E P Potter; T R Nagy
Journal:  Int J Body Compos Res       Date:  2005

2.  Mice chronically fed a westernized experimental diet as a model of obesity, metabolic syndrome and osteoporosis.

Authors:  Christian Demigné; May Bloch-Faure; Nicolas Picard; Houda Sabboh; Catherine Besson; Christian Rémésy; Valérie Geoffroy; Anh-Thu Gaston; Antonino Nicoletti; Albert Hagège; Joël Ménard; Pierre Meneton
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 5.614

3.  Validation of OSTA among Filipinos.

Authors:  Julie T Li-Yu; Lyndon J Q Llamado; Tito P Torralba
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-07-19       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Efficacy of proline in the treatment of menopause.

Authors:  Sun-Young Nam; Myoung-Schook Yoou; Hyung-Min Kim; Hyun-Ja Jeong
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2016-01-31

5.  Trps1 differentially modulates the bone mineral density between male and female mice and its polymorphism associates with BMD differently between women and men.

Authors:  Lishi Wang; Wenli Lu; Lei Zhang; Yue Huang; Rachel Scheib; Xiaoyun Liu; Linda Myers; Lu Lu; Charles R Farber; Gaifen Liu; Cong-Yi Wang; Hongwen Deng; Robert W Williams; Yongjun Wang; Weikuan Gu; Yan Jiao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Genetic Dissection of Femoral and Tibial Microarchitecture.

Authors:  Lu Lu; Jinsong Huang; Fuyi Xu; Zhousheng Xiao; Jing Wang; Bing Zhang; Nicolae Valentin David; Danny Arends; Weikuan Gu; Cheryl Ackert-Bicknell; Olivia L Sabik; Charles R Farber; Leigh Darryl Quarles; Robert W Williams
Journal:  JBMR Plus       Date:  2019-11-11
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.