Literature DB >> 16849820

One mechanostat or many? Modifications of the site-specific response of bone to mechanical loading by nature and nurture.

T M Skerry1.   

Abstract

The concept of the mechanostat was not new in 1983, when Harold Frost coined the term to describe a mechanism by which bone responded to habitual exercise and changes in loading with structurally appropriate alterations in bone architecture. However, the word "mechanostat" has a meaning that is immediately apparent, and its adoption has led to a much wider appreciation of the process of functional adaptation by other scientists than those whose primary research focus is in the biology of adaptation. One problem exists though: it is widely thought that in a single individual, there is a setting for the mechanostat, just as a single thermostat might set the temperature for a whole house, and this is reflected in the idea that bones throughout the skeleton require a specific strain magnitude for maintenance. Increases in loading above that threshold are expected to induce bone formation and a stiffer structure that then experiences again the habitual strain magnitude. Reductions in strain magnitude supposedly induce resorption to reduce tissue mass and architectural properties so that the lower loading restores habitual strain magnitude. That widely held belief of a single unifying number of strain is fundamentally flawed. The purpose of this article is to explain the real basis of the mechanostat; that the skeleton responds to a complex strain stimulus, made up of numerous different parameters, of which peak magnitude is only one, and that the strain stimulus is different in different parts of the skeleton, so there is no universal number to describe a tissue strain magnitude that underlies the mechanostat's setting. Furthermore, males and females have different responses to loading, and those responses change in response to many factors including genetic constitution, age, concomitant disease, nutrient availability, and exposure to drugs or biochemicals. In summary then, there is not a single mechanostat controlling the skeleton of each of us. At a fundamental tissue level, small functional units of bone each have their own multifactorial threshold target strain stimuli for a given set of dynamic modifying influences. Understanding the biology behind the way that each of these mechanostats functions independently is likely to have pervasive consequences on our ability to control bone mass by manipulation of loading, either directly through different exercise regimens, or in a targeted manner using tailored site and individual specific pharmaceuticals.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16849820

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact        ISSN: 1108-7161            Impact factor:   2.041


  27 in total

1.  Swimming and bone: Is low bone mass due to hypogravity alone or does other physical activity influence it?

Authors:  A Gómez-Bruton; A González-Agüero; A Gómez-Cabello; A Matute-Llorente; J A Casajús; G Vicente-Rodríguez
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Role of genetic background in determining phenotypic severity throughout postnatal development and at peak bone mass in Col1a2 deficient mice (oim).

Authors:  Stephanie M Carleton; Daniel J McBride; William L Carson; Carolyn E Huntington; Kristin L Twenter; Kristin M Rolwes; Christopher T Winkelmann; J Steve Morris; Jeremy F Taylor; Charlotte L Phillips
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2008-01-05       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 3.  Influence of body weight on bone mass, architecture and turnover.

Authors:  Urszula T Iwaniec; Russell T Turner
Journal:  J Endocrinol       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 4.286

4.  Transmission of Mechanical Information by Purinergic Signaling.

Authors:  Nicholas Mikolajewicz; Simon Sehayek; Paul W Wiseman; Svetlana V Komarova
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 5.  Physiological Redundancy and the Integrative Responses to Exercise.

Authors:  Michael J Joyner; Jerome A Dempsey
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 6.915

Review 6.  Osteocyte control of bone remodeling: is sclerostin a key molecular coordinator of the balanced bone resorption-formation cycles?

Authors:  R Sapir-Koren; G Livshits
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Hindlimb Skeletal Muscle Function and Skeletal Quality and Strength in +/G610C Mice With and Without Weight-Bearing Exercise.

Authors:  Youngjae Jeong; Stephanie M Carleton; Bettina A Gentry; Xiaomei Yao; J Andries Ferreira; Daniel J Salamango; MaryAnn Weis; Arin K Oestreich; Ashlee M Williams; Marcus G McCray; David R Eyre; Marybeth Brown; Yong Wang; Charlotte L Phillips
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  Time-course of exercise and its association with 12-month bone changes.

Authors:  Riikka Ahola; Raija Korpelainen; Aki Vainionpää; Juhani Leppäluoto; Timo Jämsä
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-11-12       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Adaptation of connexin 43-hemichannel prostaglandin release to mechanical loading.

Authors:  Arlene J Siller-Jackson; Sirisha Burra; Sumin Gu; Xuechun Xia; Lynda F Bonewald; Eugene Sprague; Jean X Jiang
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 5.157

10.  Fluid pressure and flow as a cause of bone resorption.

Authors:  Anna Fahlgren; Mathias P G Bostrom; Xu Yang; Lars Johansson; Ulf Edlund; Fredrik Agholme; Per Aspenberg
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.