In Vivo Small Animal Imaging: A Comparison with Gross and Histopathologic Observations in Animal Models

Hyo eun Bhang, Noriko Tsuchiya, Polina Sysa-Shah, Christoper T. Winkelmann, Kathy Gabrielson

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter


Few publications have compared non-invasive in vivo imaging with either gross or histopathology in rodent models. Many researchers are using either in vivo imaging or histology to test their hypotheses. In vivo imaging methods are ideal for longitudinal surveys to follow disease progression or to probe different disease processes that histopathology does not address, but in most cases imaging has been used in investigational toxicity studies rather than routine safety assessment. Evaluation of drugs for toxicity or efficacy typically uses gross pathology as an initial morphologic screening method followed by the gold standard, histopathology. Each of these methods has its own merits and, in most cases, can complement or validate one another. This chapter will focus on examples that utilize both imaging (. in vivo or ex vivo) and pathologic analysis to compare and contrast the strengths and weaknesses of each morphological method. © 2013

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationHaschek and Rousseaux's Handbook of Toxicologic Pathology
PublisherElsevier Inc.
Number of pages29
ISBN (Print)9780124157590
StatePublished - Aug 29 2013


  • Computed tomography (CT)
  • Gross pathology
  • Histopathology
  • Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
  • Magnetic resonance microscopy (MRM)
  • Nuclear imaging
  • Optical imaging
  • Positron emission tomography (PET)
  • Rodent
  • Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)
  • Ultrasound

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'In Vivo Small Animal Imaging: A Comparison with Gross and Histopathologic Observations in Animal Models'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this