Table 2.
Micro- and Nano-Scale Imaging Technique | Brief Description of the Technique | Invasiveness | Outcomes | Spatial Resolution | 2D or 3D | Advantages | Disadvantages |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
In Vitro/In Vivo Application | |||||||
Stereomicroscopy Based on Histological Sections | Histology from the bone tissue is obtained and then the sample is properly treated (fixation, dehydration and clearing, embedding, sectioning, staining and mounting). The histological section is then observed by means of an optical microscope | Yes | Traditional technique for the visualization of bone microarchitecture | ~1.6 µm [58] | 2D | Bone remodeling assessment [59] | Destructive and invasive technique Limitations related to the bidimensional output images: the three-dimensional features are lost. High-resolution images (at least 1.4 µm or better) are required to identify and measure individual resorption cavities in the process of bone remodeling [59] |
In vitro | |||||||
Micro-Computed Tomography (Micro-CT) and Nano-Computed Tomography (Nano-CT) | Micro- and nano-CT scans use radiographs to generate cross-sections of bone, that are generally processed (image reconstruction) to generate a virtual 3D model without destroying the original bone sample | No Generally, the samples are obtained from surgical wastes that derive from prosthetic treatment |
Microarchitectural 3D data for both the cortical and the trabecular sections (tissue volume, bone volume, bone surface, bone volume fraction, bone surface to tissue volume, trabecular/cortical thickness, degree of anisotropy, cortical porosity, etc.) [37]. Local and global parameters related to the lacunar network are obtained [36] |
1.2 µm (micro-CT) ~50–150 nm (nano-CT) |
3D | Large number of obtainable outputs (morphological parameters at different scales) Detailed finite element 3D models could be implemented by using micro-CT images |
Static evaluation of micro-scale features Not suitable for in vivo human evaluation due to the high radiation dose No detection of the canalicular network (insufficient resolution for the micro-CT scans) Nano-CT |
In vitro | |||||||
Peripheral QCT (pQCT) and High-Resolution pQCT (HR-pQCT) | Dedicated CT scanners for the forearm (radius and ulna) and leg (tibia and fibula) | No Low radiation dose (≈0.003 mGy) [37] |
Analysis of the trabecular and cortical sections (BMD, bone mineral content and bone geometrical parameter calculation). Acquisition of biomechanical parameters, such as the cross-sectional moment of inertia. Evaluation of the functional muscle–bone unit [60]. |
Isotropic voxel size of 82 μm with HR-pQCT | 3D | High precision and accuracy Low radiation dose Applicable for the study of a large number of diseases, especially pediatric (useful in applications where trabecular and cortical sections are affected in a different way) |
Evaluation restricted to the appendicular bone Only transversal data are available for fracture risk prediction Low spatial resolution |
In vivo | |||||||
Synchrotron Radiation Imaging (SR) | A high-intensity white beam travels around a fixed closed loop. It permits a high level of detail in bone visualization (ultra-structural porosity detection) | No Generally, the samples are obtained from surgical wastes that derive from prosthetic treatment |
Morphological analysis of ultra-structural porosities | Voxel size of 0.9 μm for the white beam [61] | 3D | Visualization of the lacunar and canalicular network Phase contrast permits the clear detection of micro-cracks |
Reduced field of view |
In vitro | |||||||
Micro-MRI and nano-MRI | The technique generates images by exploiting the nuclear magnetic behavior of different atoms in a sample tissue placed in a magnetic field | No | Structural parameters, such as trabecular bone thickness and mean bone volume fraction, associated with bone biomechanical properties and fracture resistance | Spatial resolution up to 25 µm (micro-MRI) and ~10 nm for the nano-MRI | 3D | Non-destructive technique Good special resolution Good contrast resolution [62] |
Long acquisition times High costs [62] |
In vivo | |||||||
Laser Scanning Confocal Microscopy (LSCM) | LSCM employs lasers at proper wavelengths to excite fluorochromes that are used to stain bone sections | Yes | Correlation between micro-crack parameters and bone matrix toughness Comparison among damage morphologies [13] |
180 nm laterally and 500 nm axially [63] | 2D/3D images of consecutive planes can be reconstructed into a 3D image in vitro. |
Evaluation of bone microdamage | Axial resolution in depth impaired by spherical aberration [63] High costs |
Scanning Electon Microscopy (SEM) | SEM produces images of the bone sample by scanning the surface with a focused beam of electrons | Yes | Quantitative analysis of fracture surfaces Visualization of microdamage morphology, fiber bridging and interlamellar separation [13] |
~1 nm | 3D In vitro |
Significant information related to sub-micro-scale damage | Destructive technique (sample surfaces should be conductive → bone needs to be coated with conductive materials) |
Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) | The deflections of a cantilever on the surface of the bone sample are transduced into electrical signals | Yes | Topographical parameters of fractured bone surfaces (mineral particle sizes) Identification of sacrificial bonding |
Vertical resolution → up to 0.1 nm Lateral resolution → ~30 nm |
3D In vitro |
Versatile imaging technique for the visualization of fracture surfaces High accuracy Non-destructive technique [64] |
Small dimensions of the single scan image size (150 × 150 µm, compared with mm for SEM) Slow scan time [64] |