4.6 Article

Changes in cortical bone mineralization in the developing mandible: A three-dimensional quantitative computed tomography study

期刊

JOURNAL OF BONE AND MINERAL RESEARCH
卷 15, 期 4, 页码 700-709

出版社

AMER SOC BONE & MINERAL RES
DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2000.15.4.700

关键词

cortical bone; quantitative computed tomography; bone mineral density; mandible; growth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) was completed in 34 subjects between the ages of 9 and 33 years with symmetrical mandibles in order to investigate the three-dimensional cortical bone mineral density (BMD) distribution in the mandible, The number and distribution of the pixels were determined at three levels: (1) representing the entire mandibular bone; (2) the cortical bone at 60% above the baseline defined as the segmentation level (around 1050 mg/cm(3)) and representative of only cortical bone; and (3) the highest mineralized cortical bone (>1250 mg/cm(3)). The geometrical distribution of the highest mineralized areas was evaluated by three-dimensional reconstruction of the images, The total number of Pixels for the entire mandible increased significantly at each time point represented at four increasing ages groups 9-11 years of age, 12-14 years of age, 15-17 years of age, and >18 years of age). The male and female subjects had a similar total number of pixels for the entire mandible before the age of 11, but the male subjects showed a significantly larger total number of mandibular pixels after that age. Comparison of the number of pixels for pure cortical bone (60% segmentation level) and the highest mineralized cortical bone indicated a significant increase with maturation with the greatest change occurring between the 13-year and 16-year age groups. However, the ratio of cortical bone/total bone increased at a more rapid rate in the male subjects and reached a plateau by the 16-year age group, showing distinct differences in mineralization of the mandible between the sexes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据