Brief communication: Paleohistopathological analysis of pathology museum specimens: Can periosteal reaction microstructure explain lesion etiology?
Dados Bibliográficos
| AUTOR(ES) | |
|---|---|
| ANO | 2009 |
| TIPO | Artigo |
| PERIÓDICO | American Journal of Physical Anthropology |
| ISSN | 0002-9483 |
| E-ISSN | 1096-8644 |
| EDITORA | Berghahn Journals (United Kingdom) |
| DOI | 10.1002/ajpa.21081 |
| CITAÇÕES | 14 |
| ADICIONADO EM | 2025-08-18 |
| MD5 |
509a96338cdf9f4c29158da1aa24c9dd
|
Resumo
The assertion that the microstructure of periosteal new bone formation can be used to differentiate between disease etiologies (Schultz: Yrbk Phys Anthropol 44 2001 106–147; Schultz: Identification of pathological conditions in human skeletal remains, 2nd ed. London: Academic Press 2003 73–109) was tested in a pilot‐study, using diagnosed bone specimens from St George's Hospital Pathology Museum, London, UK. Embedded bone specimens exhibiting pathological periosteal new bone formation were examined using scanning electron microscopy in back‐scattered electron imaging mode (SEM‐BSE). The results suggest that several histological features (i.e. Grenzstreifen, Polsters, and sinuous lacunae) deemed to be diagnostic of specific pathological conditions are of no specific diagnostic value, as they are encountered in pathological conditions of differing disease etiology. These results tie in with a previous investigation demonstrating a lack of diagnostic qualitative or quantitative characteristics seen in the macroscopic and radiographic appearance of periosteal reactions (Weston: Am J Phys Anthropol 137 2008 48–59). Am J Phys Anthropol, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.