» Articles » PMID: 37315002

Analysis of Fixation Materials in Micro-CT: It Doesn't Always Have to Be Styrofoam

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2023 Jun 14
PMID 37315002
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Good fixation of filigree specimens for micro-CT examinations is often a challenge. Movement artefacts, over-radiation or even crushing of the specimen can easily occur. Since different specimens have different requirements, we scanned, analysed and compared 19 possible fixation materials under the same conditions in the micro-CT. We focused on radiodensity, porosity and reversibility of these fixation materials. Furthermore, we have made sure that all materials are cheap and easily available. The scans were performed with a SkyScan 1173 micro-CT. All dry fixation materials tested were punched into 5 mm diameter cylinders and clamped into 0.2 ml reaction vessels. A voxel size of 5.33 μm was achieved in a 180° scan in 0.3° steps. Ideally, fixation materials should not be visible in the reconstructed image, i.e., barely binarised. Besides common micro-CT fixation materials such as styrofoam (-935 Hounsfield Units) or Basotect foam (-943 Hounsfield Units), polyethylene air cushions (-944 Hounsfield Units), Micropor foam (-926 Hounsfield Units) and polyurethane foam, (-960 Hounsfield Units to -470 Hounsfield Units) have proved to be attractive alternatives. Furthermore, more radiopaque materials such as paraffin wax granulate (-640 Hounsfield Units) and epoxy resin (-190 Hounsfield Units) are also suitable as fixation materials. These materials often can be removed in the reconstructed image by segmentation. Sample fixations in the studies of recent years are almost all limited to fixation in Parafilm, Styrofoam, or Basotect foam if the fixation type is mentioned at all. However, these are not always useful, as styrofoam, for example, dissolves in some common media such as methylsalicylate. We show that micro-CT laboratories should be equipped with various fixation materials to achieve high-level image quality.

Citing Articles

An enteric ultrastructural surface atlas of the model insect .

Windfelder A, Steinbart J, Graser L, Scherberich J, Krombach G, Vilcinskas A iScience. 2024; 27(4):109410.

PMID: 38558941 PMC: 10981077. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109410.

References
1.
Hipsley C, Aguilar R, Black J, Hocknull S . High-throughput microCT scanning of small specimens: preparation, packing, parameters and post-processing. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):13863. PMC: 7431592. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-70970-7. View

2.
Strotton M, Bodey A, Wanelik K, Darrow M, Medina E, Hobbs C . Optimising complementary soft tissue synchrotron X-ray microtomography for reversibly-stained central nervous system samples. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):12017. PMC: 6089931. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-30520-8. View

3.
Schneider P, Stauber M, Voide R, Stampanoni M, Donahue L, Muller R . Ultrastructural properties in cortical bone vary greatly in two inbred strains of mice as assessed by synchrotron light based micro- and nano-CT. J Bone Miner Res. 2007; 22(10):1557-70. DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.070703. View

4.
Goldner D, Karakostis F, Falcucci A . Practical and technical aspects for the 3D scanning of lithic artefacts using micro-computed tomography techniques and laser light scanners for subsequent geometric morphometric analysis. Introducing the StyroStone protocol. PLoS One. 2022; 17(4):e0267163. PMC: 9022823. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267163. View

5.
Abel T, Bourke A . Can micro-computed tomography imaging improve interpretation of macroscopic margin assessment of specimen radiography in excised breast specimens?. J Cancer Res Ther. 2020; 16(6):1366-1370. DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_949_19. View