woven bone

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From:Barry Rittman <brittman@mail.db.uth.tmc.edu> (by way of histonet)
To:histonet <histonet@magicnet.net>
Content-Type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I'm sorry but I have accidentally deleted the message that originally
asked about quantitation for this. Sometimes the delete finger is faster
than the human eye (or brain).
To the best of my knowledge, there is no  simple histological test that
will allow us to distinguish woven bone from lamellar bone. Woven bone
is a purely histological term based on morphology and a term generally
not used by biochemists etc.
Woven bone is generally regarded as a form of bone that is laid down
rapidly, with less orientation of fibers and cells and  greater numbers
of cells per unit area than lamellar bone. In most cases woven bone is
transient and is usually replaced by lamellar bone in which there is a
more regular arrangement of cells and well oriented collagen fibers.
Bone markers that are commonly used (such as osteopontin osteocalcin,
CBFA etc.) do not distinguish between woven and lamellar bone. As woven
bone is remodeled it is possible that there are some detectable changes
in the extracellular matrix during this process.
Your use of polarized light to distinguish collagen fiber orientation
would seem to be the most appropriate technique for distinguishing the
boundary between woven and lamellar bone. I am not sure which image
analysis system you are using but as far as quantitation is concerned,
if you omit the nuclear stain and use a van Gieson stain, you should be
able to easily distinguish bone matrix from it's background. You can
then use  image analysis to draw a line at the boundary between the two
forms of bone and then measure within the area you have selected.
If you get into real problems, you can always photograph the specimen
and then cut out the lamellar bone portion  from the photograph. You can
then use reflected light to give you the image and measure as normal.
While this appraoch may seem a bit crude, it is often much more
efficient time-wise than messing around trying to get an accurate
detection of the area you want on the image analysis screen.
Hope that this information is of use to you.
Please call me if you would like to discuss this.

Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
Content-Description: Card for Barry Rittman
Content-Disposition: attachment;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Attachment converted: hard drive:brittman.vcf 9 (TEXT/ttxt) (00017A97)

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>