Summary
Inter-observer variation has been examined for a number of histomorphometric indices in 20 normal human iliac crest biopsies. Quantitation was performed using an eye-piece graticule and eye-piece micrometer. The same sections were examined by two observers and the methodology was identical. Intra-observer variation was also assessed.
Significant inter-observer differences were found for the measurement of total trabecular bone volume, osteoid volume and surface, double plus single and double tetracycline labeled surfaces, and the mean osteoid seam width. The percentage variance due to inter-observer variation was highest for osteoid surface and volume, total resorption surface, and mean osteoid seam width. Intra-observer variation in both observers was small.
We conclude that a large inter-observer variation may occur in the measurement of a number of histomorphometric indices, even when section preparation and methodology are identical. Caution should be used in basing the diagnosis of metabolic bone disease on strictly defined control data from other observers, particularly when this has been obtained from centers where the effects of inter-observer variation may be magnified by differences in methodology.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Woods CG, Morgan DB, Paterson CR, Gossmann HH (1968) Measurement of osteoid in bone biopsy. J. Pathol Bacteriol 95:441–447
Courpron P (1972) Donnees histologiques quantitatives sur le vieillissement osseux humain. Thesis, Lyon, France
Giroux J-M, Courpron P, Meunier P (1975) Histomorphometrie de l'ostéopénie physiologique sénile. Thesis, Lyon, France
Olah AJ (1976) Influence of microscopic resolution on the estimation of structural parameters in cancellous bone. In: Meunier PJ (ed) Bone histomorphometry. 2nd Int Workshop. Société de la Nouvelle Imprimerie Fournié, 31000 Toulouse, France pp 55–61
Visser WJ, Niermans HJ, Roelofs JMM, Raymakers JA (1976) Comparative morphometry of bone biopsies obtained by two different methods from the right and the left iliac crest. In: Meunier PJ (ed) Bone histomorphometry. 2nd Int Workshop. Société de la Nouvelle Imprimerie Fournié, 31000 Toulouse, France, pp 79–87
Melsen F, Melsen B, Mosekilde L (1978) An evaluation of the quantitative parameters applied in bone histology. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand (A) 86:63–69
Visser VJ, Roelofs JMM, Peters JPJ, Lentferink MHF, Duursma SA, Sampling variation in bone histomorphometry. In: Jee WSS, Parfitt AM (eds) Bone histomorphometry. 3rd Int Workshop. Société Nouvelle de Publications Médicales et Dentaires, 75009 Paris France pp 429–433
De Vernejoul M-C, Kuntz D, Miravet L, Goutallier D, Ryckewaert A (1981) Bone histomorphometric reproducibility in normal patients. Calcif Tissue Int 33:369–374
Birkenhager-Frenkel DH, Schmitz PIM, Breuls PNWM, Lockefeer JHM, Heul vd RO Biological variation as compared to inter-observer variation and intrinsic error of measurement, for some parameters, within single bone biopsies. In: Meunier PJ (ed) Bone histomorphometry. 2nd Int Workshop. Société de la Nouvelle Imprimerie Fournié, 31000 Toulouse, France, pp 63–67
Vedi S, Compston JE, Webb A, Tighe JR (1982) Histomorphometric analysis of bone biopsies from the iliac crest of normal British subjects. Metab Bone Dis Rel Res 4:231–236
Delling G, Luehmann H, Baron R, Mathews CHE, Olah A. Investigation of intra-and inter-reader reproducibility. In Jee WSS, Parfitt AM (eds) Bone histomorphometry. 3rd Int Workshop. Société Nouvelle de Publication Médicales et Dentaires, 75009, Paris, France, pp 419–427
Vedi S, Tighe JR, Compston JE (1984) Measurement of total resorption surface in iliac crest trabecular bone in man. Metab Bone Dis Rel Res. 5:275–280
Duncan H (1973) Cortical porosis: a morphological evaluation. In: Jaworski ZFG (ed) 1st Workshop on Bone Histomorphometry. University of Ottawa Press, p 78
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Compston, J.E., Vedi, S. & Stellon, A.J. Inter-observer and intra-observer variation in bone histomorphometry. Calcif Tissue Int 38, 67–70 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02556831
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02556831