
This review reports on proceedings of a bone histomorphometry session conducted at the Fortieth International IBMS Sun Valley Skeletal Tissue Biology Workshop held on August 1, 2010. The session was prompted by recent technical problems encountered in conducting histomorphometry on bone biopsies from humans and animals treated with anti-remodeling agents such as bisphosphonates and RANKL antibodies. These agents reduce remodeling substantially, and thus cause problems in calculating bone remodeling dynamics using in vivo fluorochrome labeling. The tissue specimens often contain few or no fluorochrome labels, and thus create statistical and other problems in analyzing variables such as mineral apposition rates, mineralizing surface and bone formation rates. The conference attendees discussed these problems and their resolutions, and the proceedings reported here summarize their discussions and recommendations.
Histomorphometry, Bone Density Conservation Agents, Diphosphonates, RANK Ligand, Bone remodeling, histomorphometry, Bone and Bones, Over-suppression, Animals, Humans, bone remodeling
Histomorphometry, Bone Density Conservation Agents, Diphosphonates, RANK Ligand, Bone remodeling, histomorphometry, Bone and Bones, Over-suppression, Animals, Humans, bone remodeling
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 133 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
