MicroCT versus sTSLIM 3D Imaging of the mouse cochlea

Jan A.N. Buytaert, Shane B. Johnson, Manuel Dierick, Wasil H.M. Salih, Peter A. Santi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

29 Scopus citations


We made a qualitative and quantitative comparison between a state-of-the-art implementation of micro-Computed Tomography (microCT) and the scanning Thin-Sheet Laser Imaging Microscopy (sTSLIM) method, applied to mouse cochleae. Both imaging methods are non-destructive and perform optical sectioning, respectively, with X-rays and laser light. MicroCT can be used on fresh or fixed tissue samples and is primarily designed to image bone rather than soft tissues. It requires complex backprojection algorithms to produce a two-dimensional image, and it is an expensive instrument. sTSLIM requires that a specimen be chemically fixed, decalcified, and cleared; but it produces high-resolution images of soft and bony tissues with minimum image postprocessing and is less expensive than microCT. In this article, we discuss the merits and disadvantages of each method individually and when combined.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)382-395
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Histochemistry and Cytochemistry
Issue number5
StatePublished - 2013


  • Light-sheet fluorescence microscopy
  • Micro-computed tomography
  • Mouse cochlea
  • Orthogonal-plane fluorescence optical sectioning microscopy
  • Scanning thin-sheet laser imaging microscopy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'MicroCT versus sTSLIM 3D Imaging of the mouse cochlea'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this