Literature DB >> 10525716

Trabecular bone architecture in the distal radius using magnetic resonance imaging in subjects with fractures of the proximal femur. Magnetic Resonance Science Center and Osteoporosis and Arthritis Research Group.

S Majumdar1, T M Link, P Augat, J C Lin, D Newitt, N E Lane, H K Genant.   

Abstract

To determine whether magnetic resonance (MR)-derived measures of trabecular bone architecture in the distal radius are predictive for prevalent hip fractures, 20 subjects with hip fractures and 19 age-matched postmenopausal controls were studied. Bone mineral density (BMD) measures at the hip (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, DXA) and the distal radius (peripheral quantitative computed tomography, pQCT) were also obtained. We compared the MR-based structural measures derived in the radius with those in the calcaneus of the same patients. In the radius, images were acquired at an in-plane resolution of 156 microm and a slice thickness of 0.5 mm. Stereologic measures such as the apparent trabecular thickness (app. Tb.Th), fractional trabecular bone volume (app. BV/TV), trabecular spacing (app. Tb.Sp) and trabecular number (app. Tb.N) were derived from the images. Measures of app. Tb.Sp and app. Tb.N in the distal radius showed significant (p<0.05) differences between the two groups, as did hip BMD measures. However, radial trabecular BMD measures showed only a marginal difference (p = 0.05). Receiver operating curve analysis was used to determine the diagnostic efficacy of BMD, structural measures and a combination of the two. The area under the curve (AUC) for total hip BMD was 0.73, and for radial trabecular BMD was 0.69. AUC for most of the measures of trabecular bone structure at the distal radius was lower than for hip BMD measures; however, AUC for app. Tb.N at the radius was 0.69, comparable to trabecular BMD using pQCT. The AUC for combined BMD (hip) and structure measures was higher (0.87) when radius and calcaneus structure was included. Measures of trabecular architecture derived from MR images combined with BMD measures improve the discrimination between subjects with hip fractures and normal age-matched controls.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Non-programmatic

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10525716     DOI: 10.1007/s001980050221

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  60 in total

1.  Evaluation of trabecular microarchitecture in nonosteoporotic postmenopausal women with and without fracture.

Authors:  Richard Kijowski; Michael Tuite; Diane Kruger; Alejandro Munoz Del Rio; Michael Kleerekoper; Neil Binkley
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 2.  Bone quality: where do we go from here?

Authors:  Mary L Bouxsein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-08-29       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Bone structure of the calcaneus: analysis with magnetic resonance imaging and correlation with histomorphometric study.

Authors:  Nathalie Boutry; Bernard Cortet; Daniel Chappard; Patrick Dubois; Xavier Demondion; Xavier Marchandise; Anne Cotten
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-03-24       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  In vivo estimation of bone stiffness at the distal femur and proximal tibia using ultra-high-field 7-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging and micro-finite element analysis.

Authors:  Gregory Chang; Chamith S Rajapakse; James S Babb; Stephen P Honig; Michael P Recht; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2011-11-30       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  7T MRI of distal radius trabecular bone microarchitecture: How trabecular bone quality varies depending on distance from end-of-bone.

Authors:  Lindsay M Griffin; Stephen Honig; Cheng Chen; Punam K Saha; Ravinder Regatte; Gregory Chang
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 4.813

6.  Finite element analysis applied to 3-T MR imaging of proximal femur microarchitecture: lower bone strength in patients with fragility fractures compared with control subjects.

Authors:  Gregory Chang; Stephen Honig; Ryan Brown; Cem M Deniz; Kenneth A Egol; James S Babb; Ravinder R Regatte; Chamith S Rajapakse
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Assessment of trabecular bone structure comparing magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla with high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography ex vivo and in vivo.

Authors:  R Krug; J Carballido-Gamio; A J Burghardt; G Kazakia; B H Hyun; B Jobke; S Banerjee; M Huber; T M Link; S Majumdar
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-11-09       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Implications of resolution and noise for in vivo micro-MRI of trabecular bone.

Authors:  Charles Q Li; Jeremy F Magland; Chamith S Rajapakse; X Edward Guo; X Henry Zhang; Branimir Vasilic; Felix W Wehrli
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Gender differences in trabecular bone architecture of the distal radius assessed with magnetic resonance imaging and implications for mechanical competence.

Authors:  Martin Hudelmaier; A Kollstedt; E M Lochmüller; V Kuhn; F Eckstein; T M Link
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 10.  Quantitative imaging techniques for the assessment of osteoporosis and sarcopenia.

Authors:  Sara Guerri; Daniele Mercatelli; Maria Pilar Aparisi Gómez; Alessandro Napoli; Giuseppe Battista; Giuseppe Guglielmi; Alberto Bazzocchi
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2018-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.