4.3 Article

Improving efficiency in stereology: a study applying the proportionator and the autodisector on virtual slides

期刊

JOURNAL OF MICROSCOPY
卷 251, 期 1, 页码 68-76

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jmi.12044

关键词

Autodisector; disector; osteoclast; proportionator; stereology; virtual tissue slides

资金

  1. Danish Rheumatism Association
  2. A.P. Moller Foundation for the Advancement of Medical Science
  3. Aase and Ejnar Danielsens Foundation
  4. Horslev Foundation
  5. Clinical Institute Aarhus University
  6. Peter Ryholts Grant
  7. Hede Nielsens Family Foundation
  8. Villum Foundation
  9. Visiopharm A/S
  10. Villum Fonden [00008721] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cell counting in stereology is time-consuming. The proportionator is a new stereological sampling method combining automatic image analysis and non-uniform sampling. The autodisector on virtual slides combines automatic generation of disector pairs with the use of digital images. The aim of the study was to investigate the time efficiency of the proportionator and the autodisector on virtual slides compared with traditional methods in a practical application, namely the estimation of osteoclast numbers in paws from mice with experimental arthritis and control mice. Tissue slides were scanned in a digital slide scanner and the autodisector was applied on the obtained virtual tissue slides. Every slide was partitioned into fields of view, and cells were counted in all of them. Based on the original exhaustive data set comprising 100% of fields of view and covering the total section area, a proportionator sampling and a systematic, uniform random sampling were simulated. We found that the proportionator was 50% to 90% more time efficient than systematic, uniform random sampling. The time efficiency of the autodisector on virtual slides was 60% to 100% better than the disector on tissue slides. We conclude that both the proportionator and the autodisector on virtual slides may improve efficiency of cell counting in stereology.

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

4.3
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