CT images were analyzed in a blinded fashion to determine total bone loss using both the Invenon Research Workplace 4.2 visualization/analysis software and ImageJ.
For DXA-BMD hip and spine bone loss, using cross-sectional data has been shown to overestimate the rate ofnormal bone loss compared with longitudinal studies [ 37].
Two common methods of calculating glenoid bone loss using CT and MRI are width measurements such as the Griffiths Index (Fig. 1) and best-fit circle surface area measurements such as the Pico Method (Fig. 2) [ 32, 33].
We also compared the trabecular bone images obtained from a previous study, in which the right forelimbs of normal female retired breeder beagle dogs (5 7 years old) were cast for 12 months to induce bone loss, using both histomorphometry and texture analysis.
Another few authors replaced bone loss using both autogenous and homogenous grafts.
Two general methods emerged when quantifying glenoid bone loss using advanced imaging, width and surface area methods.
Jing et al also demonstrated preventive effects of EMF on OVX-induced trabonelossbone loss using BMD analysis.
Evidence is currently equivocal if MRI can be used to calculate glenoid bone loss using width and surface area methods in a clinical setting [ 48, 50, 61].
Recent efforts have initially characterized molecular aspects of Brucella-induced arthritis and inflammatory bone loss using in vitro cell models (Delpino et al., 2012; Scian et al., 2011).
In addition, studies of diet-induced bone loss using QTL mapping strategies have found evidence for sex-specific variant effects [ 216].
