Sign In

A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content. Sign in or start your free trial.

In This Article

  • Summary
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Protocol
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Disclosures
  • Acknowledgements
  • Materials
  • References
  • Reprints and Permissions

Summary

This protocol uses micro-computed tomography to enable the cost-effective quantification of lean mass, including skeletal muscle and visceral tissue, adipose tissue, and skeletal tissue in small animals. It distinguishes between lean and adipose tissue, which offers significant advantages for biomedical research, particularly in translational research in small animals.

Abstract

Skeletal muscle size, mass, and composition are critical properties for studying metabolic and muscle-related diseases, as they directly impact the understanding of disease progression and treatment outcomes. Quantifying a live animal's lean, adipose, and skeletal mass is important in metabolic, physiology, pharmacologic, and geroscience studies. However, obtaining accurate body composition measurements, especially of lean mass, remains challenging due to the inherent limitations of conventional assessment techniques. Micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) is a non-invasive radiological technique that enables high-resolution visualization of internal structures in small animal models. A standardized micro-CT method can significantly enhance translational research with more reliable and impactful results, particularly during aging studies or at different time points within the same animal. Despite its potential, the lack of standardization in image acquisition and analysis methods significantly hinders the comparability of results across different studies. Herein, we present a comprehensive and detailed low-cost protocol for lean mass analysis using micro-CT to address these challenges and promote consistency in research involving small animal models.

Introduction

Size, mass, and composition are crucial skeletal muscle properties for studying muscle-related and metabolic disease mechanisms1. Sarcopenia, cachexia, atrophy, and myopathies share common phenotypes: reduction in mass, alteration in composition, and impaired muscle function2,3,4,5. However, quantifying the body composition in a living animal remains highly complex and technically challenging6.

The primary methodologies for in vivo imaging and body composition analysis are dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). These methods are primarily employed to screen and monitor diseases that lead to lean mass reduction7,8,9,10,11. DXA is the gold standard for body composition analysis due to its lower cost. However, DXA has a significant disadvantage compared to MRI and CT: its inability to spatially resolve muscle and adipose tissue1.

MRI uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to generate detailed images of the body's internal structures12. One of its main advantages over CT is its superior contrast resolution, allowing excellent differentiation between distinct soft tissue types1,13,14. Unlike CT, MRI does not use ionizing radiation, making it safer for repeated use15,16. However, MRI is more expensive and less accessible, with longer scan times and higher maintenance costs13,17. Thus, MRI instruments adapted for small animal analysis are not usually available.

Micro-CT is similar to conventional CT but tailored for small structures and biomedical research18. Micro-CT is an advanced, non-invasive radiological assessment technique that enables detailed visualization of internal structures in small animal models. Micro-CT uses X-rays to create detailed images of the body's internal structures, relying on the differential attenuation of X-rays by various tissue types. During a micro-CT scan, the mouse lies on a table that moves slowly through a circular gantry. Inside the gantry, an X-ray tube rotates around the mouse, emitting X-rays from various angles. Detectors on the opposite side capture these X-rays after they pass through the body18.

The micro-CT scanner's software processes the data from these multiple angles to reconstruct two-dimensional cross-sectional images (slices) of the body. Through reconstruction, these slices can be combined to represent the internal anatomy comprehensively19. The images produced by micro-CT scans are based on the varying degrees of X-ray attenuation by different tissues within the body. This attenuation is quantified using Hounsfield Units (HU), a scale that standardizes radiodensity20,21. The HU scale is fundamental for segmentation, as each structure has a slightly different value.

In the present article, we used HU values to accurately differentiate between bone, lean tissue, and adipose tissue1. By referencing established HU ranges, we ensured precise analysis and comparison of body composition. Herein, we demonstrate how to acquire images using micro-CT and its application in visualizing and quantifying lean, fat, and skeletal mass.

Protocol

All methods were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro (IACUC - UFRJ; A16/23-025-20). Scans were performed on male C57BL/6 mice aged 6 and 22 months.

1. Animal preparation

  1. Anesthetize mice using 2% isoflurane in a mixture of oxygen delivered via vaporization. Use a precision vaporizer for both induction and maintenance with a mixture of 100% oxygen using a precision vaporizer.
  2. Position the anesthetized animal supine on the micro-CT scanning using a mouse bed. Secure the mouse with tape to minimize movement during the scan and then insert it into the gantry.
  3. Throughout the experiment, which lasts approximately 10 min, ensure that the animal wears a mask to keep it under the anesthetic plane while receiving the maintenance dose as needed.

2. Image acquisition and reconstruction

  1. Acquire body micro-CT scans using a high-resolution preclinical imaging system. Capture a total of 1,024 projections with an exposure time of 470 ms each, using a fly mode rotation at a voltage of 60 kV and a current of 480 µA. Set the system to a 1.25 magnification, resulting in a 94.72 mm field of view (FOV) for a total acquisition time of 8.02 min. Capture images with a binning of 1 x 1, resulting in a resolution of 2,368 x 2,240 pixels.
    NOTE: The equipment used in this manuscript for micro-CT images presents limitations in obtaining head images due to the overlap with the anesthetic mask. Additionally, the entire tail length is not captured. Thus, we excluded the head and tail analysis (see section 3).
  2. Perform a scan with the same parameters on an acrylic cylindrical phantom (diameter: 2.5 cm, length: 11.5 cm) half-filled with distilled water to determine the HU for air and water. Upon completion of the acquisitions, reconstruct the images using the acquisition software with settings optimized for noise reduction and the Filtered Back Projection (FBP) algorithm. Batch-reconstruct both animal and phantom images using a 147 µm isotropic voxel size and a 640 matrix.
  3. Extract air and water HU from the phantom (raw data) using the referenced software. Convert the images into DICOM files and correct the HU values.

3. Image analysis

  1. Uploading a file
    NOTE: Micro-CT is a technique that captures images temporally and spatially, generating an image sequence. Therefore, it is necessary to open the entire folder rather than a single image.
    1. In the top left area of the interface, find the 3D Slicer menu, highlighted in a grayish-blue color. Click on Add Data (figure-protocol-3129).
    2. When a window with two options appears, select the first option: Choose Directory to Add.
    3. Navigate to the folder containing the target animal DICOM images series and click on it. This action will open the folder within the software, allowing all the images to be viewed simultaneously.
    4. Observe the images displayed across three screens. Each screen represents a different anatomical plane: coronal, sagittal, and transverse, identified by the colors green, yellow, and red, respectively.
  2. Segmentation
    1. Locate the Segment Editor (figure-protocol-3853) in the upper tab (Modules), and click on it.
    2. Click the green + Add button to create segments, defining the HU range.
    3. Create segments for bone, lean tissue, and adipose tissue by clicking 3x each.
    4. Double-click on each segment to name and color it according to the desired settings.
    5. Set the HU range for each segment using the Threshold function, located on the left side of the window. To do this, find the Threshold Range function figure-protocol-4488 and enter the HU values for each tissue type: Lean tissue (-29 to 225 HU); adipose tissue (-190 to -30 HU); bone (500 to 5,000 HU). Click the Apply button.
      NOTE: Refer to Supplemental Figure S1 for HU value comparisons.
    6. Repeat the segmentation process for each tissue type.
    7. Click Show 3D to generate a 3D rendering.
      NOTE: The rendering will appear in the blue quadrant of the display.
  3. Cleaning the image
    NOTE: After segmentation and 3D rendering, extraneous items must be excluded to ensure they are not included in the volumetric measurements of lean tissue, adipose tissue, and bone. Removing these artifacts is essential to ensure accurate analysis.
    1. Locate the "Scissors" tool (figure-protocol-5417) in the Segmentation menu.
    2. Choose either the anatomical plane or the 3D rendering for a clearer view of the object to be removed.
      1. If using an anatomical plane, click the maximize view button (figure-protocol-5759) on the colored bar of the plane. Inside the anatomical plane window, use the mouse scroll button to navigate forward or backward through the CT scan.
        NOTE: Each window can scroll independently.
      2. For 3D rendering, use the left mouse button to rotate along any axis and the right mouse button to zoom in.
        NOTE: Arrow keys on the keyboard can also rotate the image.
    3. With the Scissors tool selected, highlight the segmentation around the unwanted object and encircle it to remove it from the image. The software deletes the object automatically.
      NOTE: Make sure the operation Erase Inside is selected. If the equipment used generates images for any nonbiological image, such as the bead, anesthetic, or surgical equipment, it is important to remove it. Additionally, if any anatomic area is not wholly obtained, it is fundamental to establish an anatomic reference to remove these areas that are not fully obtained to ensure repeatability between experiments. Unwanted objects must be removed in each plane.
    4. Click the restore view layout icon (figure-protocol-7017) to return to the screen with the four windows, regardless of the window selected.
    5. Repeat the process for all windows where the object needs removal.
  4. Segmentation volume
    1. After segmentation, quantify the volumes of the segments using the quantification function found in the dropdown menu.
      NOTE: All segmentations must be visible for this action.
    2. Navigate to Quantification | Segment Statistics. Click on Apply, and wait for the software to generate a table displaying values for each segmentation. The software provides two volume values for each segmentation: Labelmap (LM) and Closed Surface (CS).
      NOTE: LM Value is generally suitable for calculating segment volumes, using the number of voxels multiplied by the volume of a single voxel. CS Value utilizes a smoothed surface model and integrates volume based on triangular surface elements. CS aligns more closely with the anatomical contours and is recommended for accurate measurements.
    3. To upload data from a new animal, save and close the scene at the file menu.
  5. Corporal composition analysis
    1. Use the volume measurements provided by the software in cm3 to convert these volumes to tissue mass and apply the appropriate density for each tissue type. Use the following tissue densities specified by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements22: 0.95 g/cm³ (adipose tissue), 1.05 g/cm³ (lean tissue), and 1.92 g/cm³ (skeletal tissue)2.
      1. To compute tissue mass, multiply the volume (cm³) obtained from the software by the respective tissue density (g/cm³):
        Adipose Tissue Mass: Volumesegmentation X 0.95 = Massadipose
        Lean Tissue Mass: Volumesegmentation X 1.05 = Masslean
        Skeletal Tissue Mass: Volumesegmentation X 1.92 = Massskeletal
        ​Total Mass: Massadipose + Masslean + Massskeletal= MassTotal
  6. Bone length measurement
    NOTE: To correct tissue mass by bone length for certain analyses, it is necessary to obtain specific bone lengths.
    1. Return to the Segment Editor menu. Hide the adipose tissue and lean tissue segmentations by clicking on the eye icon (figure-protocol-9651) next to each segment.
      NOTE: Only the segmentation corresponding to skeletal tissue should remain visible.
    2. Select the Toggle Markups/Toolbar (figure-protocol-9920) option in the upper corner of the main menu. This will open a secondary menu just below the main menu. Locate the create new line button (figure-protocol-10167).
    3. After clicking on the create new line button, navigate to the 3D reconstruction and identify the bone to be measured.
      NOTE: The recommended bones are the tibia or femur22.
    4. Once the bone is identified, left-click on one end of the bone and again on the other end of the tissue. This action allows the software to calculate the bone size.
      NOTE: For consistent measurements, select the same anatomical region of the bone for each animal. For example, the femoral head is used as one end and the lateral condyle as the other end of the femur.
  7. Data analysis and normalization
    NOTE: The mass data can be obtained as explained in section 3.5 and used as it is. Alternatively, the lean, fat, and bone mass can be normalized in two ways.
    1. Calculate the ratio between the tissue mass and the animal's weight on the day the images are obtained.
      ​Normalization to weight: Masslean ÷ Body weight
    2. Calculate the ratio between mass and bone size (for instance, femur or tibia).
      Normalization to femur: Masslean ÷ Sizefemur
      Normalization to tibia: Masslean ÷ Sizetibia
      NOTE: The normalization parameters are chosen based on the experimental question. If changes in bone size are expected (for example: when comparing bone remodeling) the normalization by body weight is suggested (item 3.7.1). Additionally, if changes in body weight are expected in your experimental question, the long bone size is the suggested normalization parameter (item 3.7.2).

Results

Proper anatomical positioning of the sedated animal on the imaging table ensures consistent and reproducible scan outcomes, highlighting the data acquisition effectiveness in achieving reliable results. Proper animal sedation throughout imaging, including specialized gas delivery systems and vaporizers, is fundamental for precise anatomical assessments (Figure 1).

Figure 2 illustrates segmentation and rendering in different anato...

Discussion

Evaluation through tomography is an effective and non-invasive method for obtaining detailed body composition information. Micro-CT, in particular, offers valuable outcome measures for preclinical studies. In the bone field, micro-CT has different uses, as analyzing the micro-architecture23 and bone remodeling24 are particularly interesting. Assessing the morphology of internal biological structure is also relevant in biomedical research, as analyzing the density of vascula...

Disclosures

The authors declare no competing interests.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Carlos Chagas Filho Foundation for Research Support of the State of Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ; E-26/010.002643/2019 and E-26/201.335/2022), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior -Brazil (CAPES)-001 Finance Code. Programa Institucional de bolsas de iniciação científica da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq; FFB: 001. 306236/2022-2 TMO-C: 309339/2023-5). The authors acknowledge National Center for Structural Biology and Bioimaging (CENABIO)/ Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro for the use of its facilities, especially the microPET/SPECT/CT platform at the Small Animal Imaging Unit (UIPA). Supplemental Figure S1 was created with BioRender.com.

Materials

NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
3DSlicer, version 5.6.23D Slicer platformA free and open-source software for image analysis and scientific visualization.
Amide, version 1.0.1Amide platformA free and open-source software used for correcting the Hounsfield Unit values in the processed DICOM images.
Amira, version 4.1Thermo Fisher ScientificUsed to extract air and water Hounsfield Unit values from the phantom's raw data and to convert images into DICOM files.
IsoforineCristáliaIsoflurane is a non-flammable liquid anesthetic agent for use in general inhalation anesthesia by vaporization.
Triumph XO subsystemGamma Medica-Ideas FlexAdvanced imaging subsystem designed for preclinical small animal imaging, offering high-resolution CT and PET capabilities for quantitative and qualitative analysis.

References

  1. Engelke, K., Museyko, O., Wang, L., Laredo, J. D. Quantitative analysis of skeletal muscle by computed tomography imaging-State of the art. J Orthop Translat. 15, 91 (2018).
  2. Peixoto da Silva, S., Santos, J. M. O., Costa e Silva, M. P., Gil da Costa, R. M., Medeiros, R. Cancer cachexia and its pathophysiology: links with sarcopenia, anorexia and asthenia. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 11 (3), 619 (2020).
  3. Lan, X. Q., et al. The role of TGF-β signaling in muscle atrophy, sarcopenia and cancer cachexia. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 353, 1-10 (2024).
  4. Bloise, F. F., Oliveira, T. S., Cordeiro, A., Ortiga-Carvalho, T. M. Thyroid hormones play role in sarcopenia and myopathies. Front Physiol. 9, 560 (2018).
  5. Yin, L., et al. Skeletal muscle atrophy: From mechanisms to treatments. Pharmacol Res. 172, 1-12 (2021).
  6. Heymsfield, S. B., Adamek, M., Gonzalez, M. C., Jia, G., Thomas, D. M. Assessing skeletal muscle mass: historical overview and state of the art. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 5 (1), 9-18 (2014).
  7. Cruz-Jentoft, A. J., et al. Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing. 48 (1), 16-31 (2019).
  8. Faron, A., et al. Quantification of fat and skeletal muscle tissue at abdominal computed tomography: associations between single-slice measurements and total compartment volumes. Abdom Radiol (NY). 44 (5), 1907-1916 (2019).
  9. Marra, M., et al. Assessment of body composition in health and disease using bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA): A critical overview. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2019, 3548284 (2019).
  10. Martin, L., et al. Cancer cachexia in the age of obesity: skeletal muscle depletion is a powerful prognostic factor, independent of body mass index. J Clin Oncol. 31 (12), 1539-1547 (2013).
  11. Schlaeger, S., et al. Association of paraspinal muscle water-fat MRI-based measurements with isometric strength measurements. Eur Radiol. 29 (2), 599-608 (2019).
  12. Kose, K. Physical and technical aspects of human magnetic resonance imaging: present status and 50 years historical review. Adv Phys: X. 6 (1), (2021).
  13. Arnold, T. C., Freeman, C. W., Litt, B., Stein, J. M. Low-field MRI: Clinical promise and challenges. J Magn Reson Imaging. 57 (1), 25-44 (2023).
  14. Wang, H., et al. Preoperative MRI-based radiomic machine-learning nomogram may accurately distinguish between benign and malignant soft-tissue lesions: A two-center study. J Magn Reson Imaging. 52 (3), 873-882 (2020).
  15. Brower, C., Rehani, M. M. Radiation risk issues in recurrent imaging. Br J Radiol. 94 (1126), (2021).
  16. Mainprize, J. G., Yaffe, M. J., Chawla, T., Glanc, P. Effects of ionizing radiation exposure during pregnancy. Abdom Radiol (NY). 48 (5), 1564 (2023).
  17. Geethanath, S., Vaughan, J. T. Accessible magnetic resonance imaging: A review. J Magn Reson Imaging. 49 (7), e65-e77 (2019).
  18. Ritman, E. L. Current status of developments and applications of micro-CT. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 13, 531-552 (2011).
  19. Khoury, B. M., et al. The use of nano-computed tomography to enhance musculoskeletal research. Connect Tissue Res. 56 (2), 106 (2015).
  20. DenOtter, T. D., Schubert, J. Hounsfield Unit. StatPearls [Internet]. , (2024).
  21. Pinto, E. M., et al. Efficacy of Hounsfield units measured by lumbar computer tomography on bone density assessment: A systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 47 (9), 702-710 (2022).
  22. Beaucage, K. L., Pollmann, S. I., Sims, S. M., Dixon, S. J., Holdsworth, D. W. Quantitative in vivo micro-computed tomography for assessment of age-dependent changes in murine whole-body composition. Bone Rep. 5, 70-80 (2016).
  23. Faot, F., Chatterjee, M., de Camargos, G. V., Duyck, J., Vandamme, K. Micro-CT analysis of the rodent jaw bone micro-architecture: A systematic review. Bone Rep. 2, 14-24 (2015).
  24. Cooper, D., Turinsky, A., Sensen, C., Hallgrimsson, B. Effect of voxel size on 3D micro-CT analysis of cortical bone porosity. Calcif Tissue Int. 80 (3), 211-219 (2007).
  25. Mrzilkova, J., et al. Morphology of the vasculature and blood supply of the brown adipose tissue examined in an animal model by micro-CT. Biomed Res Int. 2020 (1), 7502578 (2020).
  26. Li, F. W., et al. Optimal use ratio of the stromal vascular fraction (SVF): An animal experiment based on micro-CT dynamic detection after large-volume fat grafting. Aesthet Surg J. 39 (6), NP213-NP224 (2019).
  27. Berndt, S., et al. Microcomputed tomography technique for in vivo three-dimensional fat tissue volume evaluation after polymer injection. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 23 (12), 964-970 (2017).
  28. Rother, L., et al. A micro-CT-based standard brain atlas of the bumblebee. Cell Tissue Res. 386 (1), 29-45 (2021).
  29. Ijiri, T., Todo, H., Hirabayashi, A., Kohiyama, K., Dobashi, Y. Digitization of natural objects with micro CT and photographs. PLoS One. 13 (4), e0195852 (2018).
  30. Fedorov, A., et al. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging. 30 (9), 1323-1341 (2012).
  31. Ponti, F., et al. Aging and imaging assessment of body composition: From fat to facts. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 10, 861 (2020).

Reprints and Permissions

Request permission to reuse the text or figures of this JoVE article

Request Permission

Explore More Articles

Skeletal Muscle QuantificationNon invasive TechniqueMicro computed TomographyBody Composition MeasurementLean Mass AnalysisAdipose MassSkeletal MassMetabolic DiseasesTranslational ResearchImage Acquisition StandardizationAging StudiesSmall Animal ModelsResearch Protocol

This article has been published

Video Coming Soon

JoVE Logo

Privacy

Terms of Use

Policies

Research

Education

ABOUT JoVE

Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved